MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318817617 · doi:10.19044/esj.2023.v19n1p11

Higher Education Challenges in the Era of COVID-19 from the Perspective of Educators and Students (Ghana, Georgia and Pakistan Cases): A Literature Review

2023· review· en· W4318817617 on OpenAlexaff
Paul Kwame Butakor, Tamar Kakutia, Syed Mir Muhammad Shah, Elena Hunt

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Scientific Journal ESJ · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Innovations and Challenges
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreparednessPandemicHigher educationCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)CreativityPolitical sciencePerspective (graphical)PhenomenonEconomic growthPublic relationsSociologyMedicineLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For the last three years, the entire world has faced a colossal phenomenon due to the COVID-19 pandemic. All sectors and areas of life have been affected, which has forced rapid and radical changes towards adaptation in its wake. The unexpected pandemic’s mark and impact on education is more severe and longer lasting than imagined. It has evidently disrupted education provision at an unprecedented scale. This paper is a literature review that focuses on the experience of different countries and education systems during the COVID-19 pandemic. Based on the analysis of the existing literature and research on this issue, from the perspective of educators and students, including the experience of different countries around the world, the pandemic has had a great impact on higher education. This has resulted to digital transformation, which implies overcoming many challenges. The review uses particular examples of higher education in the era of COVID-19 in Georgia, Ghana, and Pakistan. The measures taken to continue education in spite of the pandemic are also highlighted. Although this phenomenon proved to be challenging, it has initiated enormous opportunities for creativity within progress. This paper further discussed barriers that students and academics faced during online teaching-learning, the pros and cons of online teaching-learning, the quality of teaching-learning, and the state of preparedness for future education.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.146
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Scientific Journal ESJSame topicEducational Innovations and ChallengesFrench-language works237,207