International Journal of

Environmental Research
and Public Health

Article
The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Quality
of Educational Process: A Student Survey
Maria-Crina Radu *, Carol Schnakovszky, Eugen Herghelegiu, Vlad-Andrei Ciubotariu and
Ion Cristea
Department of Industrial System Engineering and Management, Faculty of Engineering,
“Vasile Alecsandri” University of Bacau, Calea Marasesti 157, 600115 Bacau, Romania; scarol@ub.ro (C.S.);
eugen.herghelegiu@ub.ro (E.H.); vlad.ciubotariu@ub.ro (V.-A.C.); icristea@ub.ro (I.C.)
* Correspondence: caxinte@ub.ro




Received: 20 September 2020; Accepted: 19 October 2020; Published: 23 October 2020


Abstract: The paper presents the results of a students’ survey carried out at “Vasile Alecsandri”
University of Bacau, Romania, on the quality of educational process on online platforms in the context
of the COVID-19 pandemic. The study was addressed to students from the Faculty of Engineering and
the Faculty of Physical Education and Sports. The results of survey highlighted that most of students
were satisfied with the measures taken by the university during the lockdown period and the way the
teaching—learning-assessment process took place. However, some negative aspects were reported as:
lack of an adequate infrastructure for some students, less effective teacher-student communication and
interaction, impossibility of performing practical applications, lack of socialization, lack of learning
motivation, less objective examination (e.g., possibility of cheating), possibility of physical and mental
health degradation (e.g., too much time spent in front of screens, installation of a sedentary lifestyle).
Consequently, for the new academic year, effective, and efficient measures must be implemented
by the management of the university to remove, as much as possible, these negative issues and to
improve the performance of online educational process.

Keywords: COVID-19 pandemic; lockdown period; quality of educational process; online platforms;
student survey

1. Introduction
Education is “a fundamental human right, a global common good and a primary driver of
progress across all the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) of the 2030 Agenda as a bedrock of
just, equal, inclusive, peaceful societies” [1]. The COVID-19 pandemic, labelled as a “black swan”
event [2], “catastrophic calamity” [3] and compared to the World War II in terms of economic and
societal consequences [4,5], has caused the largest disruption of education in history, and has already
had a near universal impact on learners and teachers around the world [6,7].
In the higher education sector, universities have been forced to close the doors in response to
the growing coronavirus outbreak and, where the IT infrastructure allowed, switch classes to online
learning to keep students’ retention and maintain access to learning [8]. According to a survey carried
out by the International Association of Universities (IAU) from 25 March to 17 April 2020, two-thirds
of higher education institutions were able to move teaching online while one third could not [9].
A solution to continue teaching and learning activities was offered by the online platforms [10–13].
However, even where the necessary infrastructure existed, the immediate challenge generated by the
lockdown was to ensure clear and effective communication streams with staff and students. Teachers
did not necessarily have the appropriate skills so that they could suddenly and easily shift from
face-to-face to online teaching and often resulted in “learning by doing” or imitating the face-to-face

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 7770; doi:10.3390/ijerph17217770 www.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 7770 2 of 15

approach, which, in turn, may not guarantee the same level of quality of the educational process [14,15].
According to [16], a temporary shift to an alternate teaching mode due to crisis circumstances (e.g.,
the COVID-19 pandemic) cannot be equated with a well-planned and designed online education
process and, in our opinion, even less with face-to-face learning. Besides, technical challenges can
determine senior teachers with a long institutional tenure to leave the system, which could lead to the
loss of rich organizational experience [17]. A great burden was placed also on students who suddenly
had to possess a variety of skills, competencies, and resources [18]. These issues have impacted the
emotional, psychological, and social well-being of both teachers and students all around the world.
For instance, a study focusing on the psychological impact of COVID-19 at a Spanish university
revealed moderate to extremely severe scores of anxiety, depression, and stress for students and lower
scores for the university’s staff [19]. Higher anxiety levels due to COVID-19 related stressors was also
reported for Chinese medical college students [20]. Stress, anxiety, and worries about coronavirus
contamination and change of mental health were also highlighted in a quantitative and qualitative
study carried out on students from a public university in the United States [21]. Moreover, students
with less opportunities (e.g., lack of digital or inappropriate equipment, lack of Internet or slow
connection to Internet networks) and poor digital skills, were likely to suffer more because of the
online instruction, leading to an intensification of the existing inequities [22,23]. In [21], it is shown
that students who did not use educational technologies had a lower perception of self-efficacity, which
in turn led to a lower cognitive engagement. A similar idea was promoted in [24], which showed
that the attitude of students towards educational technology directly affected their learning process;
a negative attitude negatively impacted their academic performance.
The aim of this paper was to present the results of a students’ survey carried out at
“Vasile Alecsandri” University of Bacau (UBc), Romania, on the quality of teaching–learning assessment
process on online platforms, in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. The External and Internal Context of the UBc

Considering the evolution of the international epidemiological situation caused by the spread of
SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus as well as the declaration of the “Pandemic” by the World Health Organization
(WHO) on 11 March 2020 the emergency state was declared in Romania, starting with 16 March
2020 [25]. On 11 March 2020, the Administrative Council (AC) of UBc decided to suspend teaching
and tutorial activities, between 13 and 22 March 2020. With the establishment of the emergency
state, the University’s AC decided to extend the suspension period until 29 March 2020, and to do
the teaching activities online. All the teachers received the contact details from the secretariat of
each faculty of the group leaders from each study programme to be able to communicate easily with
the students.
Rapid solutions for the online courses had to be provided in order to avoid a negative impact
on the teaching-learning process. In the beginning, the communication with students was done
by e-mail, on different platforms, applications (e.g., Zoom, Skype, WhatsApp) and social networks,
or by phone. Meanwhile, the university’s management analysed several online platforms in order
to choose the most convenient one. A comparative analysis was carried out, considering different
criteria such as: the maximum number of participants in the free/full version, privacy, security and
end-to-end (E2E) encryption, the possibility to make recordings, exclusive features and applications
Integration (APPS Integration), the use of the whiteboard for teaching (Table 1) [26–28]. As a result
of the analysis, the Microsoft Teams platform was chosen and implemented, based on the existing
infrastructure. Starting on 15 April 2020, the platform was fully functional and the switch to the online
teaching-learning process was made. Tutorials were created on how to use the platform, both for
teachers and students. Teachers who had used until then other communication means for the online
teaching activities, could keep them further. However, the exams (including those for the completion
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 7770 3 of 15

of studies) were taken only on the Microsoft Teams platform, according to the initial planning, and only
the re-examinations were postponed for the September 2020 session, except for those related to the
final year of studies.

Table 1. Comparative analysis of online platforms.

Max. Privacy,
Platform Recording Participants Security, E2E Pricing Exclusive Feature Whiteboard
Free/Full Encryption
Skype to Skype calls; Calls to
mobiles and landlines; Group
calls; Skype Number; Caller
Chats, calls and
Storage 30 ID; One-to-one video calls;
videos are 5–12.5
Skype days in 50 free version Group video calls; Video No
encrypted, E2E $/month
cloud messaging; Instant
encryption
messaging; Send texts (SMS);
Send files; Skype Video
Conference; Skype Classroom
Integrated with Office 365,
App Integrations; Live
Microsoft Teams
Storage 30 Collaboration in Real-Time;
Microsoft is ISO 270001 Starting at
days in 250/250 Conversation Threads; Yes
Teams and SSAE16 5 $/month
cloud Collaboration with Clients
SOC certified
vendors & Suppliers; One
Note; OneDrive
Zoom Chat; Zoom Classroom;
Only features
Up to 1 GB Zoom Video Recordings;
with the latest 15–20
Zoom of cloud 100/500 Zoom Webinars; Google Yes
5.0 have E2E $/month
reporting Drive; Hip chat; Dropbox;
encryption
Slack; HubSpot; Infusionsoft
High-definition (HD) video &
audio; Screen & Document
E2E encryption
200 Sharing; In-meeting &
Yes, only in Multilayer
Cisco Webex participants in 13.5–26.95 Recording Notifications
own Security Model Yes
Meetings the 30-day free $/month Microsoft Office; Google
computer Cisco Webex
trial Calendar; Salesforce; Jira;
privacy
SharePoint Online; OneDrive
for Business
Gmail Business email; Meet
Video and voice conferencing;
Chat Team messaging;
Yes, in Privacy and Calendar Shared calendars;
6–25
Google Meet Google 100/100 security, but no Drive cloud storage; Docs No
$/month
Drive 2E2 encryption Word processing; Sheets
Spreadsheets; Slides
Presentation builder; Forms
Professional surveys builder.

2.2. The Objectives of the Survey

The classical educational process has been severely disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic and
by administrative measures taken at the national, regional, and local levels to prevent the spread of
the coronavirus infection. Thus, the UBc’s academic staff was taken by surprise in terms of digital
teaching, online knowledge transmission, and the use of appropriate technologies to online activities.
The main objective of the survey was to inspect the perception of UBc students regarding the
online education, given the fact that, up to this level (i.e., bachelor’s and master’s degree), they have
never faced this form of education. It is worth mentioning that, in Romania, and particularly at the UBc,
the classic form of education is face-to-face education. Likewise, the study did not want to confirm
or deny certain hypotheses; it was rather intended to be an analysis of the University’s situation in
terms of online education through the feedback of their own students, so as to be a starting point for
immediate measures to be implemented at the beginning of the new academic year and for further
research related to the development of online teaching methods and tools.
The specific derived objectives we pursued were:

• determining the adequacy of the existing infrastructure and the implemented online platform;
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 7770 4 of 15

• identifying the degree to which teachers cope with this way of teaching/evaluation;
• identifying the negative aspects reported by students in order to offer future solutions to remedy
them, if the COVID-19 pandemic persists or will be repeated over time.

2.3. The Study Sample

The target group consisted of students from two faculties: Faculty of Engineering (FE), bachelor
and master’s degree, and Faculty of Movements, Sports and Health Sciences (FPSE), bachelor’s degree.
The two faculties were chosen due to their specificity, namely many disciplines imply the use of
laboratories. A call for participation was also shared through WhatsApp application, by using the
existing groups, created for teacher-student communication at the two faculties. The calculation of a
correct response rate was not possible because of this channel of communication. Data collection was
gathered for two weeks.
135 students (99 students from FE and 36 students from FPSE, Table 2) responded to the survey
and key trends were identified across the responses concerning their perception over the quality of the
educational process on online platforms.

Table 2. The respondents’ affiliation.

Faculty Master’s Degree, Master’s Degree,

1st Year 2nd Year 3rd Year 4th Year
Year 1st Year 2nd Year
FE 18 29 26 21 2 3
FPSE 9 21 6 - - -

2.4. The Design of the Survey

The basic method used in conducting the study was the survey method, which used a questionnaire
as a tool. An anonymous online survey assessing the students’ opinion on the quality of the educational
process on online platforms was created using the Google Forms online application. The survey
consisted in 12 questions (see Supplemental Content—The questionnaire in Supplementary Materials)
that had as a starting point the public consultation of the European Commission on Digital Education
Action Plan. It is worth mentioning that the current survey is not connected to the public consultation
in question, and it is neither commissioned nor sponsored by the Commission; the survey period and
the sample of respondents are different from the Commission’s and thus the results are distinct and
without prejudice to the outcome of the abovementioned consultation.
Nine questions in the survey were closed questions; students had to choose between multiple
options or rank-order them, using five levels ordinal scales. There were also three open-ended questions,
which gave students the opportunity to indicate examples of tools, including digital platforms they
found particularly useful for online learning during the lockdown period as well as the advantages
and the disadvantages of online examination.
Students’ responses were automatically collected and statistically processed by the Google Forms
application. Data were then imported into the Excel program (Office 365) for a clearer graphical
representation of them, which facilitated their analysis and interpretation. The answers to the
open-ended questions were categorized on the criterion of similarity and the most frequently reported
aspects are presented in the manuscript.

3. Results
The majority of the respondents considered that the measures taken by “Vasile Alecsandri”
University of Bacau during the COVID-19 pandemic to ensure the continuity of the educational process
(question 1) were sufficient and effective (Figure 1) and only few of them (4 students from FPSE first
year and 2 students from FE, third year) stated the opposite.
 The items used to assess the online teaching, learning and assessment/examination experience
during the COVID-19 pandemic (question 2) were ranked as “good” and “very good” by most of the
students (Table 3). However, special attention should be paid to those students who did not give
these scoresRes.
Int. J. Environ. because they 2020,
Public Health may17,
belong
7770 to a vulnerable category that requires the implementation
5 ofby
15
the university of effective measures to support them.

Question 1
2.22% 2.22%
3.70%

43.70%
48.15%

To a very large extent To a large extent

To a small extent To a very small extent
Totally inefficient No opinion

Figure 1. Respondents’
Respondents’ answers to question 1: ToTo what
what extent
extent do
do you
you consider
consider that the
the measures
measures taken
by “Vasile
“Vasile Alecsandri”
Alecsandri”University
UniversityofofBacau
Bacauduring
duringthe
theCOVID-19
COVID-19pandemic
pandemic toto ensure
ensure thethe continuity
continuity of
of
thethe educational
educational process
process (teaching–learning–assessment)
(teaching–learning–assessment) were
were sufficient
sufficient andand effective.
effective.

The items
Thus, used tothe
regarding assess the online
availability of teaching, learning
the necessary and assessment/examination
infrastructure, experience
two students reported it as
during the COVID-19 pandemic (question 2) were ranked as “good” and “very good” by
being “very bad” and 4 students reported it as being “bad” in terms of the possibility to connect to most of
the students (Table
Internet and the3).availability
However, special attention
of digital shouldObviously,
equipment. be paid to these
those students
students did
whonot
didhave
not give
the
these scores because
opportunity theyonline
to use the may belong to a vulnerable
platforms, categoryAlthough
as they declared. that requires theof
most implementation by the
the students (≈90%)
universitythat
indicated of effective
they have measures to support
the necessary them.
infrastructure, the next two items show that communication
with teachers was not so effective. We believe that even the neutral responses betray actually a lack
Table 3. Respondents’
of communication. On one answers
hand, to the“short
this items regarding question
circuit” felt in the2:teacher-student
How do you appreciate the online may
communication
teaching–learning–assessment experience during the COVID-19 pandemic?
be caused by the students’ lack of learning motivation, that, as the results show, obtained the lowest
score. Items
On the other hand,the
for Quantifying the teachers’ lack of experience in online education can be another
Online
Very Good Good Neutral Bad Very Bad
explanation. TheExperience
latter idea is somehow supported by the students’ answers to the item regarding
the quality of to
Possibility online learning
connect content; most probably
to the Internet 70 teachers
52 did not9 have the
2 necessary 2 time
(everything was rapidly done) and maybe, some of them, not even the skill to design the most
Availability of digital equipment
appropriate online learning content to keep students 70 “engaged” 52 in front7 of the screen.
4 In the2matter
(phone/tablet/laptop/computer)
of online assessment/examination, students were mostly satisfied (≈83%), according to their answers
Availability and utility/efficiency of the
to item 8 in Table 3.platforms
However, 12.59% of them showed 72 49
a neutral 8 which can
position 4 either betray
2 a
online
slightInteraction
dissatisfaction with the earned grades/examination method or reflects an objective analysis of
and communication with
theirteachers
own performance and lack
(teaching courses, of involvement (something like: “I received what I deserved”; such
conducting
63 50 14 4 4
an example is offered by an engineering student who ranked with “very good” all the items, except
laboratories/seminars/other practical
the “motivationapplications)
to learn” and the “assessment/examination”, which he ranked as “very bad”).
Interaction and communication with
teachers
Table (providing personalized
3. Respondents’ answersortogroup 58
the items regarding 542: How do15you appreciate
question 5 the online
3
feedback, guidance/tutoring)
teaching–learning–assessment experience during the COVID-19 pandemic?
Quality of online learning content (e.g.,
Very Very
courses,
Itemsmultimedia content:
for Quantifying audio,
the Online Experience 62 53 Good 13Neutral 5 Bad 2
Good Bad
audio–video, etc.)
Possibility to connect to the Internet 70 52 9 2 2
Motivation
Availabilitytooflearn
digital equipment 40 67 13 7 8
70 52 7 4 2
(phone/tablet/laptop/computer)
Assessment/Examination 66 46 17 3 3
Availability and utility/efficiency of the online platforms 72 49 8 4 2

Thus, regarding the availability of the necessary infrastructure, two students reported it as being
“very bad” and 4 students reported it as being “bad” in terms of the possibility to connect to the Internet
andJ. the
Int. availability
Environ. Res. Public of digital
Health 2020,equipment.
17, x; doi: Obviously, these students did notwww.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph
have the opportunity to
use the online platforms, as they declared. Although most of the students (≈90%) indicated that they
have the necessary infrastructure, the next two items show that communication with teachers was
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 7770 6 of 15

not so effective. We believe that even the neutral responses betray actually a lack of communication.
On one hand, this “short circuit” felt in the teacher-student communication may be caused by the
students’ lack of learning motivation, that, as the results show, obtained the lowest score. On the other
hand, the teachers’ lack of experience in online education can be another explanation. The latter idea
is
Int.somehow supported
J. Environ. Res. by2020,
Public Health the 17,
students’
x answers to the item regarding the quality of online learning 6 of 15
content; most probably teachers did not have the necessary time (everything was rapidly done) and
maybe, Interaction
some of andthem,
communication
not even with
theteachers (teaching
skill to design the most appropriate online learning content to
courses, conducting laboratories/seminars/other practical 63 50 14 4 4
keep students “engaged” in front of the screen. In the matter of online assessment/examination,
applications)
students wereand
Interaction mostly satisfied
communication (≈83%),
with teachersaccording
(providing to their answers to item 8 in Table 3. However,
58 54 15 5 3
12.59%personalized
of them showed a neutral
or group feedback, position which can either betray a slight dissatisfaction with the
guidance/tutoring)
earnedQuality of online learning content
grades/examination (e.g., courses,
method multimedia
or reflects an objective62 analysis 53 of their 13 own performance
5 2 and
content: audio, audio–video, etc.)
lack of involvement (something like: “I received what I deserved”; such an example is offered by an
Motivation to learn 40 67 13 7 8
engineering student who ranked with “very good” all the 66
Assessment/Examination items, except
46 the “motivation
17 3 to learn” 3 and
the “assessment/examination”,
As for the tools that students which he ranked
found suitableas for
“very bad”).
online learning (question 3), they mentioned
As for the tools that students found
online platforms, e.g., Microsoft Teams platform, implementedsuitable for online learning (questionlevel,
at institutional 3), theybutmentioned
also other
online platforms, e.g., Microsoft Teams platform, implemented
platforms such as Zoom, Google Classroom, Edmodo, Cisco Webex, Skype; social networks; at institutional level, but also other
platforms such as Zoom, Google Classroom, Edmodo, Cisco Webex, Skype;
YouTube (very useful to find videos for different laboratories, as students stated), applications– social networks; YouTube
(very
WhatsApp.useful to find videos for different laboratories, as students stated), applications–WhatsApp.
The
The next
next issue
issue addressed
addressed in in the
the survey
survey was
was the
the possibility
possibility ofof combining
combining traditional
traditional education
education
with online education in the academic year 2020–2021 (question
with online education in the academic year 2020–2021 (question 4). When asked how 4). When asked how they
they find
find this
this
option
option considering
consideringtheir theirlearning
learningneeds, mostmost
needs, of theofstudents (73.33%)
the students agreed with
(73.33%) it, 11.85%
agreed with it, expressed
11.85%
aexpressed
neutral position
a neutral while 14.81%
position of them
while 14.81%found it asfound
of them a “bad” and
it as “very and
a “bad” bad “very
idea” bad
(Figure
idea”2).(Figure 2).

Question 4

5.93%
8.89%
11.85%
41.48%

31.85%

Very good Good Neutral Bad Very bad

2. Respondents’
Figure 2. Respondents’ answers
answers to question 4: One
One option
option for the development of the educational
process in the academic year 2020–2021 is to combine traditional (face-to-face) education with online
education. What do you think about this option, considering the learning needs of students?

Among the advantages of combining the two forms of education (question 5), they put “more
flexibility-self-paced
flexibility-self-paced learning”
learning” first,
first, in the second place, in equality,
equality, “face-to-face communication and
teacher-student interaction”
interaction” and “more diversified forms of assessment/examination” and in third
place, “less time in front
front of
of the
the screen,
screen, more
more physical
physical activities”
activities” (Figure
(Figure3).
3).
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 7770 7 of 15
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, x 7 of 15
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, x 7 of 15

70 59.26% Question 5
70
60 59.26% Question 5
[%][%]

60
50
Respondents

50 34.07%
40 32.59%
34.07% 23.70% 32.59% 28.89% 30.37% 34.07%
Respondents

40
30 28.89% 23.70% 30.37% 34.07%
30 23.70% 14.07% 16.30% 23.70%
20
20 14.07% 16.30%
10
10
0
0

of of
from

- -
- self-paced

interaction

colleagues

health
thethe

thethe

assessment/examination
groups
better

innovative
practical
physical

teaching
of of
from
- self-paced

interaction

colleagues

health

forms
assessment/examination
groups
better

innovative
practical
andand

physical
andand

teaching
of of

of of

process
progress
well-being

forms
students

monitoring
in front

mental

to to

process
Face-to-face

progress
activities

well-being
Face-to-face

disadvantaged
communication

students
applications

students
communication

diversified
monitoring
in front

mental
learning

more

perform

Opportunity
Face-to-face

activities
Face-to-face

disadvantaged

in the
communication

students
applications
communication

with

of of
teacher-student

diversified
flexibility
learning

more

perform

Opportunity

learning
in the
with

learning
teacher-student

Integration
time

Improving

support
flexibility

learning
screen,

andand
interaction

learning

Integration
practices
time

Improving

support
screen,

Better
to to
interaction

practices
Less

More
Better
Ability
More

Less

More
Ability
More

Figure
Figure 3. 3. Respondents’
Respondents’ answers
answers toto question
question 5: 5:What
Whatwould
wouldbebe the
the advantagesofofcombining
advantages combiningface-to-face
face-to-
Figure
face 3. Respondents’
education with answers
online to question 5: What would be the advantages of combining face-to-
education?
education with online education?
face education with online education?
Among
Among thethe disadvantages
disadvantages of combining
of combining the the
twotwoformsforms of education
of education (question
(question 6), students
6), students ranked
Among the disadvantages of combining the two forms of education (question 6), excluded
students
in ranked in first“Students
first position position “Students without
without access toaccess to appropriate
appropriate digital technologies
digital technologies are
are excluded from the
ranked
from theinteaching-learning
first position “Students
process”, without access an
thus showing to empathetic
appropriateattitude
digital with
technologies are excluded
their colleagues,
teaching-learning process”, thus showing an empathetic attitude with their colleagues, even ifeven
those
from
if the
those teaching-learning
who answered, process”,
mostly, have thus
the showing
necessary an empathetic
means. In attitude
second with
place wastheir colleagues,
ranked, even
“Difficulty
who answered, mostly, have the necessary means. In second place was ranked, “Difficulty for students
if those who answered, mostly,
wayhave the necessaryinmeans. In second place was ranked, to “Difficulty
to for
adaptstudents
to thistoway
adapt
of to this
learning” of learning”
and in third and
place, third place,
“Difficulty “Difficulty
for teachersfortoteachers
adapt to thisadapt
wayto of
for
this students
way of to adapt to this
teaching/assessment”way of learning”
(Figure 4). and in third place, “Difficulty for teachers to adapt to
teaching/assessment” (Figure 4). (Figure 4).
this way of teaching/assessment”
80 Question 6 69.63%
70
80 Question 6 69.63%
60
[%][%]

70 47.41%
50
60 47.41% 34.81%
Respondents

40
50 26.67% 25.93%
34.81%
Respondents

30
40 26.67% 25.93%
20
30
10
20
0
10
0
of of

of of

thethe

Difficulties/challenges
workload

appropriate
students

teachers

teaching/assessment

security
technologies

teaching-learning
without
thethe

Difficulties/challenges
way

way

workload

appropriate
students

teachers

teaching/assessment

security
thethe
from
technologies

teaching-learning
without
way

way

Increasing

from
learning
thisthis

thisthis

process

in ensuring
Increasing

information
excluded
forfor
forfor

learning

process
teachers’

in ensuring
Students
to to

to to

information
excluded
teachers’

to to
Difficulty
Difficulty

Students
adapt

adapt

digital
access
Difficulty
Difficulty
adapt

adapt

digital
access

areare
to to

to to

Figure 4. Respondents’ answers to question 6: What would be the disadvantages of combining face-
Figure
Figure 4.Respondents’
Respondents’
4. education
to-face answers
answers
with online totoquestion
question
education? 6: 6:
What would
What be the
would bedisadvantages of combining
the disadvantages face-
of combining
to-face education
face-to-face with
education online
with education?
online education?
By analysing these results as a whole, we see that students want more flexibility in the teaching
ByBy analysing these
analysing
–learning–assessment theseprocess
results
resultsas asa whole,
(which we see
a whole,
online wethat
seestudents
education that want more
canstudents
provide) butflexibility
want more
they inaware
the teaching
areflexibility of in
thethe
–learning–assessment
teaching–learning–assessment process (which
process online
(which education
online can provide)
education can but they
provide)
importance of teacher-student face-to-face interaction and communication and the difficulties that are
but aware
they areof the
aware
importance
of can
the be
importanceof teacher-student
encountered of teacher-student face-to-face
online, both in terms interaction
face-to-face and
interaction
of infrastructure communication
andand and
communication
skills. the
Consequently, and difficulties
when the that
difficulties
asked how
can
that
the bebe
can encountered
encountered
COVID-19 online,
experience bothboth
online,
impactedin terms of infrastructure
in terms
their on onlineand
of infrastructure
opinion skills. Consequently,
and skills.
education when of
Consequently,
(question 7), 28.89% asked
when how
asked
students
howthe COVID-19
the that
stated COVID-19 experience
it became impacted
experience
“much more their
impacted opinion
their
positive”, on online
opinion
32.59% education
onbecame
that it online“much(question
education 7), 28.89%
(question
positive”, of students
7), 28.89%
for 20.74% it did of
stated
not
students that itand
change
stated became
thatfor “muchgot
15.56%
it became more positive”,
“much
“much more 32.59% 32.59%
that itmore
negative”/“much
positive”, became “much positive”,
thatnegative”.
it became 2.22% for 20.74%
“muchofpositive”,
students did
forit20.74%
did
not
not change
express and for
their opinion 15.56%
(Figuregot “much negative”/“much more negative”. 2.22% of
5).got “much negative”/“much more negative”. 2.22% of students students did not
it did not change and for 15.56% did
express their opinion (Figure 5).
not express their opinion (Figure 5).
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, x; doi: www.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, x; doi: www.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 7770 8 of 15
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, x 8 of 15
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, x 8 of 15

Question 7
Question 7
Much more positive 28.89%
Much more positive 28.89%
More positive 32.59%
More positive 32.59%
Not changed 20.74%
Not changed 20.74%
Mach negative 8.89%
Mach negative 8.89%
Mach more negative 6.67%
Mach more negative 6.67%
No opinion 2.22%
No opinion 2.22%
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Respondents [%]
Respondents [%]
Figure
Figure 5. Respondents’
5. Respondents’ answers
answers to question
to question 7: What
7: What is yourisopinion
your opinion on the
on the online online education
education considering
Figure 5. Respondents’ answers to question 7: What is your opinion on the online education
theconsidering
experiencethe experience
during during the
the COVID-19 COVID-19 pandemic?
pandemic?
considering the experience during the COVID-19 pandemic?

When
When asked
asked aboutthe
about thebenefits
benefitsofofonline
online education in in the
thefuture
future(question
(question8),8),60.74% of of
60.74% students
students
When asked about the benefits of online education in the future (question 8), 60.74% of students
considered
considered that
that it itoffers
offers“greater
“greaterflexibility
flexibility in
in the
the teaching
teaching -- learning
learningprocess”
process”and
andcontributes
contributesto to
thethe
considered that it offers “greater flexibility in the teaching - learning process” and contributes to the
development
development of
ofof their
their digital skills. Then, 28.15% of students ranked the “innovative teaching-learning
development theirdigital
digitalskills.
skills.Then,
Then, 28.15%
28.15% of of students
studentsranked
rankedthe
the“innovative
“innovative teaching-learning
teaching-learning
tools
tools and
and materials”that
materials” thatcould
couldbebeused
usedininthe
the teaching-learning
teaching-learning process
process (Figure
(Figure6).
6).
tools and materials” that could be used in the teaching-learning process (Figure 6).

70 60.74% Question 8 60.74%

70 60.74% Question 8 60.74%
60
[%]

60
[%]

50
Respondents

50
40
Respondents

40 25.19% 28.15% 26.67%

30 25.19% 28.15% 26.67% 21.48%
30 21.48%
20 11.11%
20 11.11%
10
10
0
0
opinion
ofof
- learning

communication

skills

and
- -

with
and

teaching
in in

and

adequate

opinion
- learning

communication

skills

and
ofof
ways

with
and

teaching
and

adequate
flexibility

teaching

students
ways

and

ways
students
digital
Innovative
flexibility

materials
tools

colleagues
interaction
teaching

students
and

ways
students

feedback
digital
process

Innovative

materials
tools

colleagues
interaction

NoNo
engaging

feedback
teachers
process
teaching

engaging

Innovative
Innovative

teachers
learning

providing
teaching

Improved

Innovative
Innovative
learning
Greater

assessing
providing
Improved
forfor
Greater

assessing
Easier
and
Easier
the

and
the

Figure 6. Respondents’ answers to question 8: What would be the main advantages of online
Figure
Figure 6. Respondents’
6. Respondents’ answers
answers to question
to question 8: What
8: What would
would be thebe theadvantages
main main advantages ofeducation
of online online
education in the future?
in education
the future?in the future?
But the great disadvantage of digital education (question 9) would be the “inability to carry out
ButBut
thethe great
great disadvantageofofdigital
disadvantage digital education
education (question
(question 9) would be thethe“inability toto
carry outout
practical applications” (Figure 7). This is it. Due to the specifics 9)
of would
the twobe “inability
faculties, carry
many disciplines
practical
practical applications”
applications” (Figure 7). This
(Figureapplications. is it. Due
7). This is it.Students to the
Due to the specifics
specifics of the two
of thetotwo faculties, many
faculties, to
many disciplines
disciplines
are provided with practical depend on access laboratories develop key
areare provided withpractical
practicalapplications.
applications. Students
Students depend on access totolaboratories
skills and competences. Those from the Faculty of Sport need dedicated training rooms/sport fields,key
provided with depend on access laboratories totodevelop
develop key
skills
skills and competences.
andtocompetences. Those
Those fromfrom the Faculty
thetoFaculty of Sport
of (allegedneed
Sport need dedicated training rooms/sport fields,
access medical equipment, access patients or dedicated training
real, in profile rooms/sport
clinics). fields,
Engineering
access to medical equipment, access to patients (alleged or real, in profile clinics). Engineering
access to medical
students need equipment,
technological access to patients
equipment, (alleged
tools or real, in
and devices, profilemachine-tools
models, clinics). Engineering students
etc. Practical
students need technological equipment, tools and devices, models, machine-tools etc. Practical
need technological
applications cannotequipment,
be replacedtools and devices,
by online learning models,
[11,29]. machine-tools etc. Practical applications
applications cannot be replaced by online learning [11,29].
cannot be replaced by online learning [11,29].

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, x; doi: www.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, x; doi: www.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph
 Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, x 9 of 15
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 7770 9 of 15
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, x 9 of 15
70 65.19% Question 9
[%] [%] 60 54.07% 65.19% Question 9
70 48.89%
50 54.07%
Respondents

60
40 33.33% 48.89%
50 28.15% 29.63%
25.19% 25.19%
Respondents

30
40 33.33% 17.78% 29.63%
20 25.19% 25.19% 28.15%
30
10 17.78% 2.22%
20
0
10 2.22%

No opinion
Internet

applications
hard to

and providing

and and

of motivation
colleagues

for students
in assessing
out out

of mental
equipment

platforms

Less face-to-face
institution's
feedback

moremore
0
and and

to meet

time time
communication
to carry

interaction

No opinion
Internet

applications
or to

and providing

motivation
colleagues

for students
in assessing

of mental
equipment

platforms

Less face-to-face
institution's
feedback
or hard
connection

management,
for good

healthhealth

Ineffective
to meet

communication
to carry

interaction
quality

Deterioration

management,
use online

adequate
Difficulties
adequate

practical
Inability

distractions
Inability
connection

management,
for good

teachers,

Lack
students

Ineffective
quality

Deterioration

management,
use online

Lack of
adequate
Difficulties
NeedNeed

adequate

practical
Inability

distractions
Poor Poor

Inability
teachers,
students

Figure 7. Respondents’ answers to question 9: What would be the main disadvantages of online
education in the future?
Figure
Figure 7. 7.Respondents’
Respondents’answers
answers to
to question
question 9:
9: What
What would
wouldbe
bethe
themain
maindisadvantages
disadvantagesof of
online
online
education
education in
in thethe future?
Regarding thefuture?
educational resources/contents for online learning, (question 10 in the survey),
we can notice that students have very realistic and increased expectations related to these materials;
Regardingthe
Regarding theeducational
educationalresources/contents
resources/contents forfor online
onlinelearning,
learning,(question
(question 1010 inin
thethe
survey),
survey),
firstly, these must be relevant and qualitative, then develop skills directly linked to the needs of the
we can
welabour notice
can notice that
thatand students
students have very realistic and increased expectations related to these materials;
market, thirdly,have
they very realistic
should and increased
be interactive and easy expectations
to use (Figurerelated
8). to these materials;
firstly,
firstly, these
these must
must bebe relevantand
relevant andqualitative,
qualitative, then
then develop
develop skills
skills directly
directlylinked
linked totothe needs
the needsof of
the
In order to determine what students liked about the online assessment/examination, theirthe
labour
labour market,
market, and thirdly, they should be interactive and easy to use (Figure 8).
answers to theand thirdly, they
open-ended should
question onbe interactive
this topic wereand easy to(question
analysed use (Figure
11). 8).
In order to determine what students liked about the online assessment/examination, their
answers to the open-ended question on this topic were analysed (question 11).
70 61.48% Question 10
58.52%
53.33%
[%] [%]

60
70 61.48% Question 10
50 58.52%
Respondents

60 53.33% 35.56%
40
50
30
Respondents

14.81% 35.56%
40
20
30
10 2.22%
20 14.81%
0
10 2.22%
No opinion
of labour

with the
and and

content
useto use
qualitative

with the

Degree-related
for the

0
agents
in in
of of
Relevant

in in

No opinion
of labour

with the

content
skills skills
development
qualitative

with the
easy

Degree-related
Developed
for the

agents
market

education
collaboration
Appropriate
easy to
Relevant

requirements

economic
accordance
students'
development
Interactive,

Developed
market

education
collaboration
Appropriate

requirements

economic
accordance
students'
Interactive,

Figure
Figure 8. 8.Respondents’
Respondents’ answers
answerstoto
question 10: What
question makesmakes
10: What the online
the learning resourcesresources
online learning and content
and
useful?
content useful?
Figure 8. Respondents’ answers to question 10: What makes the online learning resources and content
useful?
In Thus,
order 32.58% of students
to determine whatmentioned the lack
students liked of stress/comfort
about related to the examination;
the online assessment/examination, their26.66%
answers
of students
to the open-ended highlighted
question a higher
on thisflexibility
topic (the
were possibility
analysed to take 11).
(question the exam in other locations—e.g.,
Thus, 32.58% of students mentioned the lack of stress/comfort related to the examination; 26.66%
at Thus,
work, 32.58%
for those of who havementioned
students a job, without having
the lack to miss work);related
5.18% ofto students emphasized the of
of students highlighted a higher flexibility (the of stress/comfort
possibility to take the exam the examination;
in other 26.66%
locations—e.g.,
faster
students examination compared to face-to-face examination; 4.44% of them reported a more adequate
at work,highlighted
for those who a higher
have a flexibility
job, without (the possibility
having to miss to take 5.18%
work); the exam in other
of students locations—e.g.,
emphasized the
degree
at faster of
work,examinationcomplexity
for those who of the
have atojob,examination requirements/easier
without having to miss examination;
work); 5.18% 4.44%
of students outlined the
compared face-to-face examination; 4.44% of them reported a moreemphasized
adequate
theimprovement
degree
of digital skills. Other mentioned benefits were, for instance, the innovative forms of
faster ofexamination
complexity compared to face-to-face
of the examination examination; examination;
requirements/easier 4.44% of them 4.44%reported
outlineda the
more
assessment/examination, and even the possibility to cheat during the exams (2 students reported this
improvement
adequate degreeofofdigital skills. of
complexity Other
the mentioned
examination benefits were, for instance,
requirements/easier the innovative
examination; 4.44% forms of
outlined
fact). 11.11% of students stated that there are no advantages of online examination and some of them
theassessment/examination,
improvement of digital and even
skills. the possibility
Other mentionedtobenefits
cheat during
were, the
for exams (2 students
instance, reported
the innovative this of
forms
did not express their opinion. As for the open-ended question regarding the disadvantages of online
fact). 11.11% of studentsand
assessment/examination, stated
even thatthe
there are no advantages
possibility of online
to cheat during the examination and some
exams (2 students of them
reported this
did11.11%
fact). not express their opinion.
of students stated Asthatfor the open-ended
there question
are no advantages ofregarding the disadvantages
online examination and someof online
of them
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, x; doi: www.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph
did not express their opinion. As for the open-ended question regarding the disadvantages of online
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, x; doi: www.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 7770 10 of 15

assessment/examination (question 12), students mentioned the following issues: the lack of Internet
connection (18.52%) and adequate digital equipment (3.7%), the possibility to cheat (11.85%), the lack
of face-to-face teacher-student interaction (11.85%), the lack of practical applications (9.63%)-in this
respect, it is worth mentioning that in face-to-face learning both engineering and sports students are
evaluated during the semester at practical applications; probably some of them liked this assessment
method and lacked it online. Other reported disadvantages include the subjective evaluation (7.41%),
not enough examination time (3.7%), too much time spent in front of the computer (2.22%), lack of
motivation (0.74%), insecure platforms (0.74%), stress (0.74%) etc. 11.11% of students stated that there
are no disadvantages.

4. Discussion
The carried-out survey revealed a series of negative aspects related to the development of online
educational processes at UBc from a student’s perspective: (1) There were few students who did not
have the necessary infrastructure (e.g., digital equipment, internet connection) to ensure the smooth
running of the teaching/learning process; (2) even if the infrastructure existed for most of the students,
the communication with teachers was not so effective; (3) the lack of possibility to perform practical
applications; (4) lack of some students’ motivation for learning; (5) ineffective online examination
(e.g., possibility of cheating, subjective evaluation); (6) lack of socialization/face-to-face interaction and
communication of students with teachers and colleagues; (7) potential affecting of mental and physical
health (e.g., installation of sedentarism, a problem reported by many other students [10,30]).
To address these findings and improve the overall quality of the online educational process,
at the beginning of the academic year 2020–2021, in the context of COVID-19 pandemic persistence,
the university management adopted a series of measures, as follows:
1. Year tutors (one for each study program) had the task of identifying all students who complained
about lack of internet, problems with internet connection and lack of appropriate digital equipment.
In view of these, they received from faculty secretaries, the contact data of students (telephone and
email) and each student was called to confirm the email address and to verify the possibility of
connecting to the Microsoft Teams platform. For students who did not have the necessary digital
equipment, the university committed to providing them (e.g., tablets) to facilitate their access to
classes. However, the problem could be partially solved because the students’ family conditions
(e.g., number of people living in the same household, lack of private space, involvement in
household chores) may limit their accessibility to online learning [21,31]. For those students who
live in areas not covered by internet networks or with a weak internet signal, the university can
offer rooms in dormitories with better internet connection. The number of places in dormitories,
however, are limited due to the restrictions imposed by the common order of the Minister of
Education and Research and the Minister of Health, Order 5487/1494/2020 for the approval of the
measures for organizing the activity within the educational units/institutions in epidemiological
safety conditions for the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 virus diseases, published in the Official
Gazette, Part I no. 804 of 1 September 2020 [32].
2. In order to improve the communication of teachers with students, it was decided in AC and then
conveyed at lower hierarchical levels (through faculty councils and department heads) that each
teacher would have the obligation to work closely with students, according to the UBc’s slogan:
“The university is beside you”. The responsibility was passed to the department heads who
must work closely with colleagues in order to make them aware and responsible in getting better
engagement with students (e.g., providing fast and appropriate feedback, offering constructive
guidance, etc.).
3. To compensate for the lack of physical presence in laboratories, during September 2020, with the
help of a local television network, videos were recorded with each teacher briefly describing the
laboratory work and the corresponding equipment. These videos will be used during the online
meetings with students; we consider that, as high level education providers, universities must pay
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 7770 11 of 15

the utmost attention to the practical training of students because otherwise both the individual
and society may pay the price of education failure. On the one hand, students must develop skills
that facilitate their access to the labor market, which is still quite challenging for young graduates.
On the other hand, employers globally will be facing difficulties in finding workers with proper
skills. Thus, ensuring skills is a key factor in developing a sustainable society.
4. A delicate issue that we must address is how to increase students’ motivation in online learning.
The phenomenon has been reported by other authors [21,31] and, according to specialists, the key
is a careful instructional design and planning of the online educational process. The engagement
of students in online classes must be gained by designing engaging tasks and applying a different
pedagogy so that to capture the students’ interest [16]. Engagement is the heart of successful
learning. According to the specialty literature, the focus must be on both, behavioural and
emotional engagement: from paying minimal attention to actively processing the information
(e.g., making connections to the previously learned material, critically analysing new information),
from being minimally interested in feeling excited and enthusiastic [33,34]. Teachers’ engagement,
their sensitivity and interest in students’ development, clearly communicated expectations,
respectful and fair treatment of students, are prerequisite for engaging students [35–37]. It is
not enough to produce page turners that are just screens of text, but to use different tools and
methods to draw attention, increase motivation and promote learning–learning for life because
almost everything we do requires the use of knowledge in some way, not just having it. However,
the educational process is a relationship and in order to be successful, both “parties” need to be
equally involved. If students attend classes just for the sake of being present or to get good grades,
they are less likely to become engaged beyond a superficial (just get it done) level. In this case,
even the best teachers and learning content might not determine a deep engagement of students.
This distinction between the two types of engagement is very important. Still, teachers must not
give up. According to specialists [38], learners are not necessarily dependent on their will to
develop interest or be interested. They may be dependent largely on supports to find ways to
connect with the content that they are to learn, and while they need to make their own connections,
they are also likely to need support to perceive them. While learners may make a cognitive
evaluation about some content, they may also not be aware that their interest has been triggered
until much later in the process of its development. As interest develops and deepens, the desire
for knowledge and value develop concurrently. In later phases of interest development, they can
be so engrossed in engagement that they are not reflecting on it. Similar ideas are promoted by the
specialists of Tress Academic, who claim that activity and action induce motivation. According to
them, low motivation is not a pre-existing emotional state but a consequence of a lack of activity
and explain this by what they call the “motivation spiral”: the more an individual is involved
in a certain activity and makes progress in achieving the proposed goals, the more that person
becomes satisfied with each achievement, increasing self-confidence, happiness, that further
increases the willingness and motivation to work more. In other words, the more you accomplish,
the more motivated you feel [39]. Hence, to succeed in the online teaching-learning approach,
the crucial elements are: (1) to make sure that students are active not passive learners in front
of the screens, and (2) to establish a close teacher–student relationship, based on availability,
friendliness and helpfulness, as it influences students’ motivation to learn in a positive way [40,41].
However, the problem for many teachers in Romania (where face-to-face teaching is the main
form of education) is “how to do this”, since no governmental program has been implemented
to provide teachers with competences and skills for online teaching, which would ensure high
quality digital academic experience. Except for various courses focused on the application of tools
for interactive education (e.g., the use of digital platforms), nothing else was done. Adopting
an online learning environment is not only a technical issue but a pedagogical and instructional
challenge [24] that must be overpassed by implementing appropriate instructional strategies [42].
A technical solution that was adopted by the UBc university at the beginning of this academic
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 7770 12 of 15

year, in order to increase student engagement, was to equip classrooms and laboratories with
video cameras focused on blackboards, so that teachers could perform various demonstrations
and solve problems (e.g., for mathematics) that students could view in real time, as if they were
present in class.
5. To ensure the objectivity of assessments and examination to prevent fraudulence and plagiarism,
the accent should be placed on continuous evaluation throughout the semester (e.g., by designing
homework with a certain degree of complexity). Another possibility would be the open-book
online examination [43].
6. For the lack of socialization and face-to-face interaction and communication of students with
teachers, there is nothing to do at the moment, as the University is constrained by the measures
taken at the national and local levels to limit the spread of the coronavirus. For example, Bacau city
is under the red code due to the large number of infested people. However, socialization cannot
be neglected; respondents put it in 3rd place in the disadvantages’ hierarchy of online education,
after the inability to carry out practical applications and the need for adequate infrastructure.
As specialists from University of Oxford stated [44], the university is not just about taking classes;
place is also important, as is the relationship with colleagues and teachers [11]. Under these
circumstances, a solution would be to engage students and teachers in various extracurricular
projects organized by the student league, which is well represented in the university and at
the country level. An example that such things could work is presented in [17] (e.g., virtual
chairman’s lunches with the organization members).

We believe that each padlock has a key and that there are no problems for which a solution cannot
be found, especially if we are open to collaborate and share examples of good practices. Among the
countless evils it has caused, the COVID-19 pandemic could have a silver lining, if we know how to
exploit it: that of unifying us in a common front to overcome all obstacles put in front of us. However,
it is worth mentioning that UBc, as a state public university, has a limited autonomy, so the majority of
its measures must fall within the limits allowed by the legislation and regulations applicable at the
national level.

Limitations and Future Directions

The present study has certain limitations. First, it was not intended to be an actual research carried
out by specialists in the field of education sciences, but it was an analysis carried out by engineers (the
authors are teachers from the Engineering Faculty, some of them members of the top management
of the university), with the main stated aim of getting feedback from students in order to identify
solutions for removing the reported negative aspects, as well as the opportunities improving the quality
of the online educational process in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Second, the survey was
conducted during the summer holiday, which is why the number of respondents was quite small and
they may not be representative for the entire student population. Third, the survey instrument was not
a standardized questionnaire. Fourth, the effectiveness of the implemented measures could not be
validated at present, but it will be validated in time. For this reason, we intend to conduct new surveys,
during this semester, with the support of the Professional Counselling Department, addressing more
specific issues related to the students’ performance and well-being in the conditions of participating in
crisis education.

5. Conclusions
The conducted study revealed that although the university has taken important steps to ensure the
continuity of the educational process in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, there is still a long way
until we have successfully implemented a real and effective online educational system. The challenge
to which UBc must face is not related to the technical feasibility of implementing such a system (where
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 7770 13 of 15

things are already quite advanced), but especially to the preparation of human resources for this form
of education.

Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at http://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/21/7770/s1,

The questionnaire.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, M.-C.R., C.S. and E.H.; Methodology, M.-C.R., C.S. and I.C.; Software,
M.-C.R., E.H. and V.-A.C.; Writing—original draft preparation, M.-C.R.; Writing—review and editing, M.-C.R. and
C.S.; Supervision, C.S. and I.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Acknowledgments: The authors would like to thank all the students for agreeing to participate in this survey,
and the university’s management for the support given in carrying out this study. The publication of this work
was funded by the Ministry of Education and Research, through the National Council for the Financing of Higher
Education, Romania, grant number CNFIS-FDI-2020-0461.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. United Nations. Policy Brief: Education during COVID-19 and beyond. August 2020. Available
online: https://www.un.org/development/desa/dspd/wp-content/uploads/sites/22/2020/08/sg_policy_brief_
covid-19_and_education_august_2020.pdf (accessed on 4 September 2020).
2. Krishnamurthy, S. The future of business education: A commentary in the shadow of the Covid-19 pandemic.
J. Bus. Res. 2020, 117, 1–5. [CrossRef]
3. Sundarasen, S.; Chinna, K.; Kamaludin, K.; Nurunnabi, M.; Baloch, G.M.; Khoshaim, H.B.; Hossain, S.F.A.;
Sukayt, A. Psychological impact of Covid-19 and lockdown among university students in Malaysia:
Implications and policy recommendations. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 6206. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
4. Nicola, M.; Alsafib, Z.; Sohrabic, C.; Kerwand, A.; Al-Jabird, A.; Iosifidisc, C.; Aghae, M.; Aghaf, R.
The socio-economic implications of the coronavirus pandemic (Covid-19): A review. Int. J. Surg. 2020, 78,
185–193. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
5. Staszkiewicz, P.; Chomiak-Orsa, I.; Staszkiewicz, I. Dynamics of the Covid-19 contagion and mortality:
Country factors, social media, and market response evidence from a global panel analysis. IEEE Access 2020,
8, 106009–106022. [CrossRef]
6. Romero-Blanco, C.; Rodríguez-Almagro, J.; Onieva-Zafra, M.D.; Parra-Fernández, M.L.;
Prado-Laguna, M.D.C.; Hernández-Martínez, A. Social distancing compliance under Covid-19
pandemic and mental health impacts: A population-based study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17,
6567. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
7. Ebner, M.; Schon, S.; Braun, C.; Ebner, M.; Grigoriadis, Y.; Haas, M.; Leitner, P.; Taraghi, B. Covid-19 epidemic
as e-learning boost? Chronological development and effects at an Austrian university against the background
of the concept of “e-learning readiness”. Future Internet 2020, 12, 94. [CrossRef]
8. The World University Rankings. The Impact of Coronavirus on Higher Education. Available
online: https://www.timeshighereducation.com/hub/keystone-academic-solutions/p/impact-coronavirus-
higher-education (accessed on 4 September 2020).
9. International Association of Universities. The Impact of Covid-19 on Higher Education Around the World.
IAU Global Survey Report. Available online: https://www.iau-aiu.net/IMG/pdf/iau_covid19_and_he_
survey_report_final_may_2020.pdf (accessed on 4 September 2020).
10. Romero-Blanco, C.; Rodríguez-Almagro, J.; Onieva-Zafra, M.D.; Parra-Fernández, M.L.;
Prado-Laguna, M.D.C.; Hernández-Martínez, A. Physical activity and sedentary lifestyle in university
students: Changes during confinement due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health
2020, 17, 6567. [CrossRef]
11. Rizun, M.; Strzelecki, A. Students’ acceptance of the Covid-19 impact on shifting higher education to distance
learning in Poland. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 6468. [CrossRef]
12. Raaper, R.; Brown, C. The Covid-19 pandemic and the dissolution of the university campus: Implications for
student support practice. J. Prof. Cap. Community 2020. [CrossRef]
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 7770 14 of 15

13. Almarzooq, Z.I.; Lopes, M.; Kochar, A. Virtual learning during the Covid-19 pandemic. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.
2020, 75, 2635–2638. [CrossRef]
14. Zhang, W.; Wang, Y.; Yang, L.; Wang, C. Suspending classes without stopping learning: China’s education
emergency management policy in the Covid-19 outbreak. J. Risk Financ. Manag. 2020, 13, 55. [CrossRef]
15. Watermeyer, R.; Crick, T.; Knight, C.; Goodall, J. Covid-19 and digital disruption in UK universities: Afflictions
and affordances of emergency online migration. High. Educ. 2020. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
16. Hodges, C.; Moore, S.; Lockee, B.; Trust, T.; Bond, A. The Difference between Emergency Remote Teaching
and Online Learning. EDUCAUSE Rev. 2020. Available online: https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/3/the-
difference-between-emergency-remote-teaching-and-online-learning (accessed on 11 September 2020).
17. Stoller, J.K. A perspective on the educational “SWOTh” of the Coronavirus Pandemic. CHEST 2020.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
18. Iivari, N.; Sharma, S.; Venta-Olkkonen, L. Digital transformation of everyday life—How Covid-19 pandemic
transformed the basic education of the young generation and why information management research should
care? Int. J. Inf. Manag. Sci. 2020, 55, 102183. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
19. Odriozola-González, P.; Planchuelo-Gómez, A.; Irurtia, M.J.; de Luis-García, R. Psychological effects of the
COVID-19 outbreak and lockdown among students and workers of a Spanish university. Psychiatry Res.
2020, 290, 113108. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
20. Cao, W.; Fang, Z.; Hou, G.; Han, M.; Xu, X.; Zheng, J.; Dong, J. The psychological impact of the COVID-19
epidemic on college students in China. Psychiatry Res. 2020, 287, 112934. [CrossRef]
21. Patricia, A. College students’ use and acceptance of emergency online learning due to Covid-19. Int. J.
Educ. Res. in press. [CrossRef]
22. Govindarajan, V.; Srivastava, A. What the shift to virtual learning could mean for the future of higher ed.
Harv. Bus. Rev. 2020. Available online: https://hbr.org/2020/03/what-the-shift-to-virtual-learning-could-
mean-for-the-future-of-higher-ed (accessed on 7 September 2020).
23. Zimmerman, J. Coronavirus and the Great Online-Learning Experiment. Chron. High. Educ. 2020. Available
online: https://www.chronicle.com/article/coronavirus-and-the-great-online-learning-experiment/ (accessed
on 7 September 2020).
24. Ali, W. Online and remote learning in higher education institutes: A necessity in light of Covid 19 pandemic.
High. Educ. Stud. 2020, 10, 16–25. [CrossRef]
25. The President of Romania. In DECREE no. 195 of March 16, 2020 on the establishment of the state of
emergency on the Romanian territory; OFFICIAL GAZETTE no. 212 of 16 March 2020.
26. Techjockey. Which Is More Secure: Zoom vs. Skype vs. Teams vs. Webex Comparison. Available online:
https://www.techjockey.com/blog/zoom-vs-skype-vs-teams-webex (accessed on 26 June 2020).
27. Techzine. Zoom vs. Google Meet vs. Microsoft Teams vs. Webex Meetings vs. BlueJeans. Available
online: https://www.techzine.eu/blogs/collaboration/46302/zoom-vs-google-meet-microsoft-teams-cisco-
webex-meetings-bluejeans/ (accessed on 26 June 2020).
28. TechRepublic. Zoom vs. Microsoft Teams, Google Meet, Cisco Webex and Skype: Choosing the Right
Video-Conferencing Apps for You. Available online: https://www.techrepublic.com/article/zoom-vs-
microsoft-teams-google-meet-cisco-webex-and-skype-choosing-the-right-video-conferencing-apps-for-
you/ (accessed on 26 June 2020).
29. Nuere, S.; de Miguel, L. The digital/technological connection with Covid-19: An unprecedented challenge in
university teaching. Technol. Knowl. Learn. 2020. [CrossRef]
30. Galle, F.; Sabella, E.A.; Ferracuti, S.; De Giglio, O.; Caggiano, G.; Protano, C.; Valeriani, F.; Parisi, E.A.;
Valerio, G.; Liguori, G.; et al. Sedentary behaviors and physical activity of Italian undergraduate students
during lockdown at the time of CoViD−19 pandemic. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 6171.
[CrossRef]
31. Mishra, L.; Gupta, T.; Shree, A. Online teaching-learning in higher education during lockdown period of
Covid-19 pandemic. Int. J. Educ. Res. Open 2020. [CrossRef]
32. The common Order of the Romanian Minister of Education and Research and the Minister of Health—Order
5487/1494/2020 for the approval of the measures for organizing the activity within the educational
units/institutions in epidemiological safety conditions for the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 virus diseases,
published in the Official Gazette, Part I no. 804 of 1 September 2020.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 7770 15 of 15

33. Clark, R.C.; Mayer, R.E. E-Learning and the Science of Instruction: Proven Guidelines for Consumers and Designers
of Multimedia Learning, 4th ed.; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2016; pp. 219–233.
34. National Research Council Institute of Medicine. Engaging Schools. Fostering High School Students’ Motivation
to Learn; The National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2004; pp. 31–33.
35. Ulmanen, S.; Soini, T.; Pietarinen, J.; Pyhalto, K. Students’ experiences of the development of emotional
engagement. Int. J. Educ. Res. 2016, 79, 86–96. [CrossRef]
36. Pittaway, S.M. Student and staff engagement: Developing an engagement framework in a faculty of education.
Aust. J. Teach. Educ. 2012, 37, 37–45. [CrossRef]
37. Luo, Y.; Xie, M.; Lian, Z. Emotional engagement and student satisfaction: A study of Chinese college students
based on a nationally representative sample. Asia-Pac. Edu. Res. 2019, 28, 283–292. [CrossRef]
38. Renninger, K.A.; Su, S. Interest and its development. In The Oxford Handbook of Human Motivation; Ryan, R.M.,
Ed.; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2012; pp. 167–187.
39. Tress Academic. Overcoming Low Motivation While in Covid-19 Lockdown. Available online: https:
//tressacademic.com/overcome-low-motivation/ (accessed on 7 September 2020).
40. Strachan, R.; Liyanage, L. Active student engagement: The heart of effective learning. In Global Innovation of
Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. Professional Learning and Development in Schools and Higher Education;
Layne, P.C., Lake, P., Eds.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2015; Volume 11, pp. 255–274. [CrossRef]
41. Kember, D. Understanding the Nature of Motivation and Motivating Students through Teaching and Learning in
Higher Education, 1st ed.; Springer: Singapore, 2016; pp. 79–96.
42. Kim, J. Learning and teaching online during Covid-19: Experiences of student teachers in an early childhood
education practicum. Int. J. Early Child. 2020, 52, 145–158. [CrossRef]
43. Eurboonyanun, C.; Wittayapairoch, J.; Aphinives, P.; Petrusa, E.; Gee, W.D.; Phitayakorn, R. Adaptation to
open-book online examination during the Covid-19 pandemic. J. Surg. Educ. in press. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
44. Burki, T.K. Covid-19: Consequences for higher education. Lancet Oncol. 2020, 21, 758. [CrossRef]

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional
affiliations.

© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).