Teaching Without the Face: The Influence of Online Teaching on Professors’ Sense of Relational Responsibility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although distance education is not a new phenomenon, the unprecedented advent of the COVID-19 pandemic left educators across the country with no option but to deliver their courses in an online format. Many studies have demonstrated the influence of distance education on teachers’ practices and several studies correlate teachers’ interaction to students’ motivation, participation, satisfaction, and performance in distance education. There is, however, a paucity of research that analyzes the influence of students’ physical presence on a teacher’s sense of relational responsibility, especially at the university level and with distance education—let alone when teaching online is not an option. The purpose of this study was therefore to understand the ways in which the abrupt and involuntary shift from physical to distance education caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and the absence of students’ physical presence affected teacher-educators’ perceived sense of relational responsibility, as articulated by Levinas. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 professors teaching in Faculties of Education across Canada. The main question driving this research was: in what ways does the physical absence of students influence professors’ perceived sense of relational responsibility? Findings are presented and discussed under three main themes: relationships, responsibility, and responsivity. Key words: Teacher responsibility, online education, higher education, relationality Bien que l'enseignement à distance ne soit pas un phénomène nouveau, l'avènement sans précédent de la pandémie du COVID-19 a laissé les éducateurs de tout le pays sans autre choix que de donner leurs cours dans un format en ligne. Alors que de nombreuses études ont démontré l'influence de l'enseignement à distance sur les pratiques des enseignants et que plusieurs études mettent en corrélation l'interaction des enseignants avec la motivation, la participation, la satisfaction et les performances des élèves dans l'enseignement à distance, il existe peu de recherches analysant l'influence de la présence physique des élèves sur le sens de la responsabilité relationnelle d'un enseignant, en particulier au niveau universitaire et avec l'enseignement à distance—et encore moins lorsque l'enseignement en ligne n'est pas une option. Le but de cette étude était donc de comprendre la manière dont le passage brusque et involontaire de l'éducation en personne à l'éducation à distance causé par la pandémie de COVID-19 et l'absence de présence physique des élèves ont affecté le sentiment perçu de responsabilité relationnelle des enseignants-formateurs, tel qu'articulé par Levinas. Des entrevues semi-structurées ont été menées avec 12 professeurs enseignant dans les facultés d'éducation du Canada. La principale question qui a motivé cette recherche était la suivante : de quelle manière l’absence physique des étudiants influence-t-elle le sentiment perçu par les professeurs de responsabilité relationnelle ? Les résultats sont présentés et discutés sous trois thèmes principaux : les relations, la responsabilité et la réactivité. Mot clés : Responsabilité des enseignants, enseignement en ligne, enseignement supérieur, relationnalité
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 | 0.007 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".