Search results

The emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic changed the way in which education was delivered in early 2020, and the impacts of these changes continue to be questionable. The aims of this study were to evaluate: (1) the results obtained by students of the Dentistry course in the progress test carried out both before and after the pandemic, (2) the results obtained by a specific group of students who took the test in 2019–2022, and compare their results and (3) subjects that showed a reduction in the percentage of correct answers when the two tests were compared.

The progress test consisting of 100 multiple choice questions was applied before and after the pandemic to all students in the Dentistry course. The analyses were performed using the IBM SPSS for Statistics v.26 software program. The level of significance of 5% was adopted (<0.05).

The test was applied to 320 students in 2019 and to 272 in 2022, of whom the sample of this study was composed. The mean score values in 2019 (M = 49.10; SD = 12.03) were significantly (p = 0.026) higher than those in the year 2022 (M = 46.97; SD = 12.15), with the disciplines in the area of specific knowledge showing a greater drop in the percentage of correct answers by students. This study showed that the emergency remote education had a negative effect on the academic performance of students, based on the progress testing as an evaluation method.

Many studies that assessed the impacts of the pandemic on teaching were focused on the opinions of students. However, the great advantage of our study was the use of a theoretical assessment tool to verify student performance. The post-pandemic landscape beckons for comprehensive inquiries into these domains. This type of research would be valuable for gathering evidence relative to the performance of students after the emergency remote education.

The COVID-19 pandemic has created a significant disruption in the educational systems worldwide. Some institutions opted for emergency remote education due to the need to cancel in-person activities. The aims of this paper were to evaluate the use of asynchronous methodology in health sciences education, determine whether asynchronous methodology was sacrificing overall student satisfaction, and investigate whether satisfaction improved as the program develops.

Initially, there was phase 1 that corresponded to four weeks of activities. Each professor produced a video lesson, and after each video lesson, a weekly educational activity was made available. Next, phase 2 was implemented using the same methodology, however lasting six weeks. Three questionnaires were developed, and a Likert scale was administered to verify the students’ level of satisfaction. Data were analyzed using frequency distributions, mean values, standard deviation and confidence interval. The normality of the sum data (total of the questionnaires) was tested using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test.

Although the students pointed out that the asynchronous methodology facilitated access to the content and considered this methodology satisfactory, they expressed a reduced level of satisfaction regarding emergency remote education in general when data from the first weeks were compared to those of the previous weeks. It is clear that students became increasingly discouraged and tired over time, which motivated the institution to shift into a combination of synchronous and asynchronous methodology to improve student learning.

Teaching in the field of health care encompasses difficult competencies that sometimes are impossible to be learned remotely, so there is a need to examine and evaluate properly the remote education in this area. With careful planning, educational institutions can evaluate their experiences during the pandemic, allowing those involved to highlight strengths and identify weaknesses to better prepare for future needs to improve remote education.