Jeneva J. Diez, Emiernafe M. Ebro, Ronna Joy C. Dequito, Tomas Jr A. Diquito


The new normal education policy in response to the pandemic crisis pushed institutions to shift from traditional face-to-face to asynchronous instruction that posed challenges particularly to science courses in higher education. The purpose of this study was to understand the learning experiences of the students and the implications of asynchronous teaching instruction in the Science, Technology, and Society course. This study utilized a convergent parallel mixed method of research employing descriptive-comparative and descriptive phenomenological research designs. There were 100 respondents for the quantitative part and 12 participants for the qualitative part. Based on the quantitative findings, the overall implementation of asynchronous instruction in the course was "excellent." Specifically, the level of implementation was "very satisfactory" in terms of Content and Course Evaluation, while "excellent" in terms of Instructional Design, Student Assessment, and Technology. There was no significant difference in the level of implementation of the course asynchronous instruction when analyzed by specialization. Moreover, based on the qualitative analysis, the learning experiences of students in asynchronous instruction were both positive and negative that implied two-way learning experiences. The general recommendation gleaned from the students was science, technology, and society asynchronous delivery improvement that covered teacher improvement, SIM improvement, and assessment tool improvement. The general recommendations of this study were improving asynchronous instruction delivery through teachers training proposals, modification of self-instructional materials, increasing the awareness and effective use of the varied assessment tools in sustaining the needs and interest of students in studying the course, creating a safe learning environment for the students, and conducting future researches to reveal significant factors which affect the learning experiences of students and the other points that the current researchers have not yet explored.


Article visualizations:

Hit counter


learning experience, asynchronous instruction, education in new normal, science, technology, and society

Full Text:



Alshammari, S. H. (2020). The Influence of Technical Support, Perceived Self-efficacy, and Instructional Design on Students’ Use of Learning Management Systems. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 21(3), 112-141. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1261606.pdf

Azzi-Huck, K., & Shmis, T. (2020). Managing the impact of COVID-19 on education systems around the world: How countries are preparing, coping, and planning for recovery [Web log post]. Retrieved from https://blogs.worldbank.org/education/managing-impact-covid-19-education-systems-around-world-how-countries-are-preparing

Berg, G. (2020). Context matters: Student experiences of interaction in open distance learning. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 21(4), 223-236.

Best, B., & Conceição, S. C. (2017). Transactional Distance Dialogic Interactions and Student Satisfaction in a Multi-Institutional Blended Learning Environment. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning, 20(1), 138-152.

Broadbent, J., & Poon, W. L. (2015). Self‐regulated learning strategies & academic achievement in online higher education learning environments: A systematic review. The Internet and Higher Education, 27, 1‐13.

Brockerhoff-Macdonald, B., Morrison, M., & Manitowabi, S. (2018). Flexible weighting in online distance education courses.

Coman, C., Țîru, L. G., Meseșan-Schmitz, L., Stanciu, C., & Bularca, M. C. (2020). Online teaching and learning in higher education during the coronavirus pandemic: students’ perspective. Sustainability, 12(24), 10367.

Commission on Higher Education. (2020). 2020 CHED Memorandum Orders. CHED. https://ched.gov.ph/2020-ched-memorandum-orders/

Creswell J. W., Miller D. (2002). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into Practice 39(3):124–130

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc.

Darling-Hammond, L., Flook, L., Cook-Harvey, C., Barron, B., & Osher, D. (2019). Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development. Applied Developmental Science, 24(2), 1–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791

Doo, M. Y., Bonk, C., & Heo, H. (2020). A meta-analysis of scaffolding effects in online learning in higher education. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(3), 60-80.

Fisher, M. R., Jr., & Bandy, J. (2019). Assessing Student Learning. Vanderbilt University Center for Teaching. Retrieved [todaysdate] from https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/assessing-student-learning/.

Ghaderizefreh, S., & Hoover, M. L. (2018). Student Satisfaction with Online Learning in a Blended Course. International Journal for Digital Society, 9(3), 1393–1398. https://doi.org/10.20533/ijds.2040.2570.2018.0172

Hussin, W. N. T. W., Harun, J., & Shukor, N. A. (2019). Online Interaction in Social Learning Environment towards Critical Thinking Skill: A Framework. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 9(1), 4-12.

Kelley, K. W., Fowlin, J. M., Tawfik, A. A., & Anderson, M. C. (2019). The Role of Using Formative Assessments in Problem-based Learning: A Health Sciences Education Perspective. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 13(2). https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1814

Li, N., Marsh, V., and Rienties, B., (2016). Modelling and managing learner satisfaction: Use of learner feedback to enhance blended and online learning experience. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 14(2), 216-242.

Llemit, L. R. G. (2020, October 22). 3 out of 10 college students hesitant with learning in ‘new normal.’ Sunstar. Retrieved from https://www.sunstar.com.ph

Mahler, D., Großschedl, J., & Harms, U. (2018). Does motivation matter?–The relationship between teachers’ self-efficacy and enthusiasm and students’ performance. PloS one, 13(11), e0207252.

Martin, F., Ritzhaupt, A., Kumar, S., & Budhrani, K. (2019). Award-winning faculty online teaching practices: Course design, assessment and evaluation, and facilitation. The Internet and Higher Education, 42, 34–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2019.04.001

Meşe, E., & Sevilen, Ç. (2021). Factors influencing EFL students’ motivation in online learning: A qualitative case study. Journal of Educational Technology & Online Learning, 4(1), 11–22. https://doi.org/10.31681/jetol

Moore, G. M. (1993). Theory of transactional distance. In D. Keegan (Ed.), Theoretical principles of distance education. New York, NY: Routledge. Retrieved on May 26, 2021, from https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1187&context=dissertations

Southern Regional Education Board. (2006). Checklist for Evaluating Online Courses Educational Technology Cooperative. https://www.sreb.org/sites/main/files/file-attachments/06t06_checklist_for_evaluating-online-courses.pdf?1565877040

United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. (2020). Education: From disruption to recovery. Retrieved from https://en.unesco.org/news/covid-19-learning-disruption-recovery-snapshot-unescos-work-education-2020

Villanueva, M. A. (2020, September 8). DepEd, CHED too distant to learners. Retrieved from https://www.philstar.com/opinion/2020/09/09/2041052/deped-ched-too-distant-learners

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. Readings on the development of children, 23(3), 34-41.

Wu, Y. (2016). Factors impacting students’ online learning experience in a learner-centred course. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32(5), 416–429. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12142.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.46827/ejes.v8i10.3937


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2021 Jeneva J. Diez, Emiernafe M. Ebro, Ronna Joy C. Dequito, Tomas Jr A. Diquito

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright © 2015-2022. European Journal of Education Studies (ISSN 2501 - 1111) is a registered trademark of Open Access Publishing Group. All rights reserved.

This journal is a serial publication uniquely identified by an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) serial number certificate issued by Romanian National Library (Biblioteca Nationala a Romaniei). All the research works are uniquely identified by a CrossRef DOI digital object identifier supplied by indexing and repository platforms. All authors who send their manuscripts to this journal and whose articles are published on this journal retain full copyright of their articles. All the research works published on this journal are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).