Palestinian University Students' Perceptions of Distance Education in Light of the Coronavirus Crisis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A study aimed to identify Palestinian university students' perceptions of using distance education in light of the Coronavirus crisis from the students' point of view, depending on the differences between gender or the university in which they study. The descriptive approach was used for the current research. The 25-paragraph questionnaire was distributed electronically through social media sites due to the closure of universities. The sample of the study was formed from (73) distributed among (16) males and (57) females and distributed to universities came (42) students of Palestine Technical University Khudouri, and (19) students of Al-Najah University and (12) students of Arab American University. The study found that Distance Education was a problem for students because of the constant need for Internet service, while Distance Education helped them with multiple sources of information. Moreover, Distance Education did not make it easier to understand teaching subjects better, nor did it make education popular for students. They preferred education that was more remote than Distance Education. The study also did not find any differences in the perceptions of Palestinian university students to use distance education in light of the Coronavirus crisis due to the variable of gender or university. The most important recommendations are providing an appropriate educational structure for implementing e-learning in Palestinian universities and removing all human, material and technical obstacles that prevent its spread in the educational system in various stages and fields. And that there is a need for Palestinian universities to offer materials that provide students with e-learning skills and techniques to facilitate the process of interaction and benefit by students with Educational materials provided electronically.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".