Healthc Inform Res.  2024 Jan;30(1):49-59. 10.4258/hir.2024.30.1.49.

Technological Challenges and Solutions in Emergency Remote Teaching for Nursing: An International Cross-Sectional Survey

• Jeon E
• Peltonen LM
• Block LJ
• Ronquillo C
• Tayaben JL
• Nibber R
• Pruinelli L
• Perezmitre EL
• Sommer J
• Topaz M
• Eler GJ
• Shishido HY
• Wardaningsih S
• Sutantri S
• Ali S
• Alhuwail D
• Abd-Alrazaq A
• Akhu-Zaheya L
• Lee YL
• Shu SH
• Lee J

• KMID: 2551860
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4258/hir.2024.30.1.49

Abstract

Objectives
With the sudden global shift to online learning modalities, this study aimed to understand the unique challenges and experiences of emergency remote teaching (ERT) in nursing education.
Methods
We conducted a comprehensive online international cross-sectional survey to capture the current state and firsthand experiences of ERT in the nursing discipline. Our analytical methods included a combination of traditional statistical analysis, advanced natural language processing techniques, latent Dirichlet allocation using Python, and a thorough qualitative assessment of feedback from open-ended questions.
Results
We received responses from 328 nursing educators from 18 different countries. The data revealed generally positive satisfaction levels, strong technological self-efficacy, and significant support from their institutions. Notably, the characteristics of professors, such as age (p = 0.02) and position (p = 0.03), influenced satisfaction levels. The ERT experience varied significantly by country, as evidenced by satisfaction (p = 0.05), delivery (p = 0.001), teacher-student interaction (p = 0.04), and willingness to use ERT in the future (p = 0.04). However, concerns were raised about the depth of content, the transition to online delivery, teacher-student interaction, and the technology gap.
Conclusions
Our findings can help advance nursing education. Nevertheless, collaborative efforts from all stakeholders are essential to address current challenges, achieve digital equity, and develop a standardized curriculum for nursing education.

Keyword

Cross-Sectional Studies, Distance Education, Nursing Education, Natural Language Processing, Digital Divide

Figure

• 

  Figure 1 Overview of the research process.

• 

  Figure 2 Differences between countries with 5 or more responses to significant questions.

Reference

References

1. Hodges C, Moore S, Lockee B, Trust T, Bond A. The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning [Internet]. Denver (CO): Educause Review;2020. [cited at 2024 Jan 30]. Available from: https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/3/the-difference-between-emergency-remote-teaching-and-online-learning.

2. Viner RM, Russell SJ, Croker H, Packer J, Ward J, Stansfield C, et al. School closure and management practices during coronavirus outbreaks including COVID-19: a rapid systematic review. Lancet Child Adolesc Health. 2020; 4(5):397–404. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2352-4642(20)30095-X.

3. Elshami W, Taha MH, Abuzaid M, Saravanan C, Al Kawas S, Abdalla ME. Satisfaction with online learning in the new normal: perspective of students and faculty at medical and health sciences colleges. Med Educ Onlin. 2021; 26(1):1920090. https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2021.1920090.

4. Kent AM, Giles RM. Preservice teachers’ technology self-efficacy. SRATE J. 2017; 26(1):9–20.

5. Peltonen LM, Pruinelli L, Ronquillo C, Nibber R, Peresmitre EL, Block L, et al. The current state of Nursing Informatics: an international cross-sectional survey. Finn J eHealth eWelf. 2019; 11(3):220–31. https://doi.org/10.23996/fjhw.77584.

6. Roach V, Lemasters L. Satisfaction with online learning: a comparative descriptive study. J Interact Online Learn. 2006; 5(3):317–32.

7. Shelton BE, Hung JL, Lowenthal PR. Predicting student success by modeling student interaction in asynchronous online courses. Distance Educ. 2017; 38(1):59–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2017.1299562.

8. Hung ML. Teacher readiness for online learning: Scale development and teacher perceptions. Comput Educ. 2016; 94:120–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.11.012.

9. Wild LM, Congdon B, Boyle K, Provost V, Schlesinger M, Salyers V, et al. Innovations in nursing education: Recommendations in response to the COVID-19 pandemic [Internet]. San Diego (CA): National Education Progression in Nursing Collaborative;2020. [cited at 2024 Jan 30]. Available from: https://oadn.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Nursing-Education-and-COVID-Pandemic-March-30-2020-FINAL-1.pdf.

10. Leigh J, Vasilica C, Dron R, Gawthorpe D, Burns E, Kennedy S, et al. Redefining undergraduate nurse teaching during the coronavirus pandemic: use of digital technologies. Br J Nurs. 2020; 29(10):566–9. https://doi.org/10.12968/bjon.2020.29.10.566.

11. Leeson W, Resnick A, Alexander D, Rovers J. Natural language processing (NLP) in qualitative public health research: a proof of concept study. Int J Qual Methods. 2019; 18:1609406919887021. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406919887021.

12. Crowston K, Allen EE, Heckman R. Using natural language processing technology for qualitative data analysis. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2012; 15(6):523–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2011.625764.

13. Jeon E, Kim J, Park HA, Lee JH, Kim J, Jin M, et al. Current status of nursing informatics education in Korea. Healthc Inform Res. 2016; 22(2):142–50. https://doi.org/10.4258/hir.2016.22.2.142.

14. Mitchell MM, Delgado C. Online learning: advantages and challenges in implementing an effective practicum experience. Open J Nurs. 2014; 4(6):379–84. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojn.2014.46044.

15. Parker C, Scott S, Geddes A. Snowball sampling. London, UK: SAGE Research Methods Foundations;2019.

16. Koltcov S, Koltsova O, Nikolenko S. Latent Dirichlet allocation: stability and applications to studies of user-generated content. In : Proceedings of the 2014 ACM Conference on Web Science; 2014 Kim 23–26; Bloomington, IN, USA. p. 161–5. https://doi.org/10.1145/2615569.2615680.

17. Xue J, Chen J, Chen C, Zheng C, Li S, Zhu T. Public discourse and sentiment during the COVID 19 pandemic: using latent Dirichlet allocation for topic modeling on Twitter. PLoS One. 2020; 15(9):e0239441. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0239441.

18. Blei DM, Ng AY, Jordan MI, Lafferty J. Latent Dirichlet allocation. J Mach Learn Res. 2003; 3:993–1022.

19. Elshami W, Taha MH, Abuzaid M, Saravanan C, Al Kawas S, Abdalla ME. Satisfaction with online learning in the new normal: perspective of students and faculty at medical and health sciences colleges. Med Educ Online. 2021; 26(1):1920090. https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2021.1920090.

20. Sacco TL, Kelly MM. Nursing faculty experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic response. Nurs Educ Perspect. 2021; 42(5):285–90. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.NEP.0000000000000843.

21. Culp-Roche A, Hardin-Fanning F, Tartavoulle T, Hampton D, Hensley A, Wilson JL, et al. Perception of online teacher self-efficacy: a multi-state study of nursing faculty pivoting courses during COVID 19. Nurse Educ Today. 2021; 106:105064. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2021.105064.

22. Berndtsson I, Dahlborg E, Pennbrant S. Work-integrated learning as a pedagogical tool to integrate theory and practice in nursing education: an integrative literature review. Nurse Educ Pract. 2020; 42:102685. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2019.102685.

23. McKay MA, Pariseault CA, Whitehouse CR, Smith T, Ross JG. The experience of baccalaureate clinical nursing faculty transitioning to emergency remote clinical teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic: lessons for the future. Nurse Educ Today. 2022; 111:105309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2022.105309.

24. Fuchs K. The difference between emergency remote teaching and e-learning. Front Educ. 2022; 7:921332. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.921332.

25. Mukhtar K, Javed K, Arooj M, Sethi A. Advantages, limitations and recommendations for online learning during COVID-19 pandemic era. Pak J Med Sci. 2020; 36(COVID19-S4):S27–S31. https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.36.COVID19-S4.2785.

26. Aristovnik A, Kerzic D, Ravselj D, Tomazevic N, Umek L. Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on life of higher education students: a global perspective. Sustainability. 2020; 12(20):8438. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12208438.