This is a research presentation material for teaching and learning

1. Evaluating Synchronous,
Asynchronous, and Hybrid e-teaching
and e-learning Tools amidst COVID 19
Pandemic
ANABELIE V. VALDEZ1, ANALYN P. GURO2 & JEFFREY P. VILLAVER3
1&2Mindanao State University and 3J.H. Cerilles State College

2. Introduction
COVID 19 pandemic brought drastic change to our
educational strategies and platforms worldwide. This pandemic
has caused the school closures worldwide and brought
significant disruptions to education across the globe even the
highest-income countries.

3. In the Philippines, most of the educational institutions
particularly the higher education institutions use a hybrid or
blended approach in teaching and learning. Hybrid approach is
a combination of offline and online classes through
synchronous and asynchronous approach.
Introduction

4. This study aims to evaluate the perceptions of the students in
terms of the effectiveness of the synchronous (together at the same
time) and asynchronous (attendance at different times). e-teaching and
e-learning tools amidst COVID 19 pandemic, that is use by selected
teachers in Mindanao State University, Marawi Campus and J.H. Cerilles
State College – Dumingag Campus.
Introduction

5. Research Questions
1. What is the students’ profile in terms of?
a) Age
b) Gender
c) Course
d) Gadgets used
e) Software/program used

6. 2. What is/are the discernment/s of the students with
regards to
a)Synchronous mode of teaching-learning approach
in e-learning
b)Asynchronous mode of teaching-learning
approach in e-learning
c) Blended (synchronous and asynchronous) mode
of teaching-learning approach in e-learning
Research Questions

7. 3. What are the benefits and educational outcome in using e-
teaching and e-learning modes?
4. What are the biggest challenges you faced when you began
taking e-learning course?
5. What are the reflections of students as online learners?
Research Questions

8. Methods
Research Design
combined quantitative
and qualitative research
technique were used in the
study. This combined approach
offers in-depth analysis of the
variables investigated and
provide triangulation of data
and multi-stage discussion.
Participants
There were 255 students from the
Mindanao State University (MSU) and 245
college students from J.H. Cerilles State College
(JH-CSC). A total of 500 students serves as the
participants of the study. These participants are
the previous students of the researchers and
were randomly selected based on their
willingness to participate on the survey.

9. Data Collection
The survey was conducted by
sending the Current survey questionnaire
to the identified participants using goggle
forms, and students email. The
participants in the interview was based
on voluntary participations and with
proper consent.
Data Analysis
In quantitative analysis, the
data were subjected to statistical
analysis using SPSS specifically
descriptive and correlational statistics.
Qualitative analyses were used in
analyzing the data gathered from the
open-ended questions answered by the
participants.
Methods

10. 1. Students Profile
Results

11. Results 1. Students Profile
Results shows that students from JH Cerilles State College
(CSC) were mostly 19-21 years old, while students from MSU
where 22-24 years’ old which mean that many of them are belong
in the graduating class .

12. 1. Students Profile
Results

13. Results
Majority (69% )are female students of
Mindanao State University (MSU) and (51%) JH
Cerilles State College (CSC).

14. Results 1. Students Profile in terms of course

15. Results 1. Students Profile

16. Results
In terms of common technological gadgets/device they use in
online classes, majority of the students from MSU used
cellphone and laptops, while JH-CSC students commonly use
cellphone.

17. Results
1. Students
Profile
For software, they
preferred to use
Goggle Classroom,
Gmail, Zoom, Video,
PowerPoint, and
Microsoft Word.

18. Results 2. Students Discernment/Opinion

19. Results
2. Students Discernment/Opinion
Table 1, students from MSU generally strongly agrees all of the
six (6) statement about synchronous e-learning and e-teaching having
a mode of 4, (strongly agree) while students from JH-CSC only agrees
on it, having a mode of 3.

20. 2. Students Discernment/Opinion
Results

21. Results
2. Students Discernment/Opinion
(Table 2). Among of the 6 statements in Table 2, statement number
2 obtained the highest frequency 155 and 140 from JH-CSC and MSU
respectively, confirming that asynchronous e-teaching and e-learning
mode helps improve their performance in their subject/course.

22. Results 2. Students Discernment/Opinion

23. 2. Students Discernment/Opinion
Results

24. Results
2. Students Discernment/Opinion
(Table 3). Among the statements students from MSU and JH-CSC
believed that instructors’ presence is essential while using e-learning
resources obtaining a frequency count of 180 and 173 respectively.

25. 3. Benefits & Educational Outcome in
e-teaching & e-learning mode
1.The effective learning is combination of both it's because we are prepared to do
all requirements and we have a time to relax because we are not a robot could not
feel stressed and depression.
2. Combination both because if we can do easy class that is simple or easy to get
we can do online but if we have a hard activities we touch do face to face so that
we can learn how to do it.
3. I think we can still learn if we take both. Interacting to teacher virtually helps
student to build more access in participating in class and also assignment still can
be used in evaluating how far is your learnings.
Results

26. 3. Benefits & Educational Outcome in
e-teaching & e-learning mode
Few said Asynchronous because…
1. Asynchronous learning means your learners can engage in courses
regardless of their time zone or location. With asynchronous learning,
learners have significantly more time to reflect on the material they are
learning, which means they are likely to understand it more thoroughly.
2. Asynchronous because you have a big time to answer your work
3. Asynchronous because I have a communication problem.
Results

27. 3. Benefits & Educational Outcome in
e-teaching & e-learning mode
Some said Synchronous because…
1. Synchronous is more effective because we need interaction nor
discussion from our instructors through live for better understanding.
2. Synchronous because I think it's the best way to learn
3. For me is synchronous because synchronous is more learning to
make in to use as an online student.
Results

28. Results 4. Challenges
1. Many said internet connectivity, and no appropriate devices and
load budget because I think financially because I need money to buy
for load.
2. Some said time management because there are unrealistic
deadlines
3. Less interaction to the instructor.
4. Conflict of schedule.
5. Technical Issues and computer literacy

29. 5. Students Reflection as online
learners
Data gathered from open-ended survey when the students were
asked “how they see themselves as an online learner were quoted
below:
Good because…
1. Good and ready for more learnings and challenges. Did everything
despite of poor internet connection
2. Pursue learning despite of struggles, difficulties with software and
websites, and challenges faced in online classes.
Results

30. 5. Students Reflection as online
learners
Not Good because…
1. Not good, uncomfortable, and struggling. Troubled,
scared, and worried on the class performance in online
2. e-learning is very stressful while the traditional
learning is very effective way of learning.
Results

31. 5. Students Reflection as online
learners
Traditional Method is better because…
1. The traditional instruction- courses it's fast to learn by
individual students than the e learning course process.
2. In e-learning, it needs stable internet connection for me to
understand what my instructor is discussing about. A lot of
struggles I must say. It's more difficult through e-learning than in
traditional.
Results

32. Conclusion
Based on the findings, students in MSU commonly use cellphone and laptops
while JH-CSC students commonly use cellphone as their technological
gadgets/device in online learning.
This implies that students from JH-CSC may not be able to procure their own
laptops due to financial incapability. Despite of the limited technological
gadgets/devices that the students they have, still they are able to use varied online
platforms on their online classes. Although students preferred synchronous and
asynchronous mode yet, they mostly favor the blended/hybrid mode generally due to
poor internet connectivity and financial limitations.

33. Students find it difficult to catch up their online classes due to poor internet
connectivity limited technological gadgets/devices and financial capabilities to buy
devices and internet connectivity fee.
Common issues and challenges they encountered includes technological skills,
technology availability, internet accessibility, and financial capacity.
Thus, flexibility of e-teaching and e-learning modes must be applied together
with the improvements in technology, internet connectivity, and financial aid or
assistance to the students and even to the teachers.
Conclusion

34. References
1. Sintema EJ. Effect of COVID-19 on the performance of grade 12 students:
Implications for STEM education. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and
Technology Education. 2020; 16(7).
Available:https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/7893
2. Pokhrel S, Chhetri R. A Literature Review on Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on
Teaching and Learning; 2021.
Available:https://doi.org/10.1177/2347631120983481
3. Malik Ghulam, Abid Hussain, Sarwar. E-Learning: Students' perspectives about
asynchronous and synchronous resources at higher education level. Bulletin of
Education and Research. 2017;39(2):183-195.

35. 4. Yates A, Starkey L, Egerton B, Flueggen F. High school students’ experience of online
learning during Covid-19: The influence of technology and pedagogy. Technology,
Pedagogy and Education. 2021;30(1):59-73.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2020.1854337
5. Hussein E, Daoud S, Alrabaiah H, Badawi R. Exploring undergraduate students’
attitudes towards emergency online learning during COVID-19: A case from the UAE.
Children and Youth Services Review. 2020;119:105699.
6. Clark C, Strudler N, Grove K. Comparing asynchronous and synchronous video vs.
text based discussions in an online teacher education course Online Learning.
2015;13(3).
References

36. 7. Cakici D. The use of ICT in teaching English as a foreign language.
Participatory Educational Research. 2016;4(2):73-77.
8. Beyth MR, Saporta K, Caspi A. Synchronous vs. asynchronous
tutorials: factors affecting students’ preferences and choices. Journal of
Research on Technology in Education. 2005;37(3).
9. Fabunmi M, Brai-Abu P, Adeniji IA. Class factors as determinants of
secondary school student’s academic performance in Oyo State,
Nigeria. Journal of Social Sciences. 2007;14(3):243-247.
Available:https://doi.org/10.1080/09718923.2007.11978355
References

37. References
10. Hrastinski S. The Potential of Synchronous Communication to Enhance
Participation in Online Discussions. Paper Presented at the 28th International
Conference on Information Systems, Montreal, Canada; December 9–12, 2007.
11. Murphy E, Rodríguez-Manzanares M, Barbour MK. Asynchronous and
synchronous teaching and learning in high school distance education:
perspectives of Canadian high school distance education teachers. British Journal
of Educational Technology. 2011;42(4):583-591.
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01112.x
12. Hrastinski S. Asynchronous and synchronous e-learning. Research Gate;
2008. Available:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/238767486