collaborative problem solving training 2021

• Online Degree Explore Bachelor’s & Master’s degrees
• MasterTrack™ Earn credit towards a Master’s degree
• University Certificates Advance your career with graduate-level learning
• Top Courses
• Join for Free

Cross Functional Collaboration

Taught in English

Financial aid available

Gain insight into a topic and learn the fundamentals

Instructor: Hector Sandoval

Included with Coursera Plus

Recommended experience

Intermediate level

Should have 3-5 years of experience in roles that require leading, supervising, and managing people and critical processes within organizations.

What you'll learn

Identify challenges, overcome barriers, foster teamwork, and leverage diverse perspectives for effective cross-functional collaboration.

Learn techniques to enhance communication, establish clear channels, and promote active listening and feedback within cross-functional teams.

Strengthen problem-solving skills, analyze different perspectives, and make informed decisions within collaborative efforts.

Utilize techniques for collaborative problem-solving, decision-making, consensus-building, and informed choices as a team.

Skills you'll gain

• conflict resolution
• Communication Enhancement
• Problem-Solving through Collaboration
• Collaborative Strategies
• Teamwork and Cooperation

Details to know

Add to your LinkedIn profile

5 quizzes, 1 assignment

See how employees at top companies are mastering in-demand skills

Earn a career certificate

Add this credential to your LinkedIn profile, resume, or CV

Share it on social media and in your performance review

There is 1 module in this course

Welcome to the "Cross-Functional Collaboration" course! This course focuses on the principles and strategies for collaborating effectively with colleagues from different functional areas. Through this course, you will learn techniques to overcome challenges, foster teamwork, and leverage diverse perspectives to achieve common goals. The course emphasizes the importance of building a culture of trust and cooperation among team members and covers various techniques to improve communication, manage conflicts, and make informed decisions through collaborative efforts.

This course is designed for front-line, junior to mid-level supervisors and manager roles who are responsible for leading teams, projects, and processes in a diverse range of organizations. By the end of the course, you will be equipped with the necessary skills to collaborate successfully with colleagues from different backgrounds and functional areas, leading to enhanced productivity and overall organizational success. To enroll in this course, participants should have 3-5 years of experience in roles that require leading, supervising, and managing people and critical processes within organizations. Join us in developing your collaborative skills and becoming a more effective leader in your organization.

Cross-Functional Collaboration

This course focuses on the principles and strategies for collaborating effectively with colleagues from different functional areas. Students will learn to overcome challenges, foster teamwork, and leverage diverse perspectives to achieve common goals. The course covers various techniques to improve communication and information sharing across departments and develop strategies for managing conflict and resolving disputes. Through case studies and group exercises, students will enhance their problem-solving skills and learn how to make informed decisions through collaborative efforts. The course also emphasizes the importance of building a culture of trust and cooperation among team members. By the end of the course, students will be equipped with the necessary skills to collaborate successfully with colleagues from different backgrounds and functional areas, leading to enhanced productivity and overall organizational success.

What's included

26 videos 2 readings 5 quizzes 1 assignment

26 videos • Total 51 minutes

• Introduction to the course and instructor • 1 minute • Preview module
• Learning objectives and outcomes  • 0 minutes
• Overview of different functional areas within organizations  • 1 minute
• Common challenges and barriers to cross-functional collaboration  • 2 minutes
• Specific examples highlighting real-world collaboration obstacles  • 1 minute
• Identifying the role of entry-level supervisors and managers in fostering collaboration  • 3 minutes
• Strategies for creating a culture of trust and cooperation  • 1 minute
• Creating the right environment  • 1 minute
• Techniques for clear and concise communication  • 2 minutes
• Active listening and empathy in cross-functional settings  • 2 minutes
• Selecting appropriate communication channels  • 1 minute
• Leveraging technology for seamless information sharing  • 1 minute
• Recognizing sources of conflict in cross-functional teams  • 1 minute
• Strategies for managing and resolving conflicts constructively  • 2 minutes
• Developing negotiation and problem-solving skills  • 2 minutes
• Analytical thinking and critical decision-making in collaborative settings  • 1 minute
• Brainstorming techniques for cross-functional teams  • 1 minute
• Evaluating potential solutions and making informed decisions  • 1 minute
• Recognizing the value of diverse perspectives in cross-functional teams  • 1 minute
• Creating an inclusive environment for diverse viewpoints  • 0 minutes
• Encouraging creativity and innovation through diverse thinking  • 2 minutes
• Techniques for integrating different perspectives for better outcomes  • 2 minutes
• Strategies for fostering teamwork and collaboration  • 1 minute
• Promoting a sense of shared purpose and goals  • 2 minutes
• Recognizing and rewarding collaborative achievements  • 3 minutes
• Recap of key takeaways  • 2 minutes

2 readings • Total 20 minutes

• Welcome to the course • 10 minutes
• Additional resources • 10 minutes

5 quizzes • Total 150 minutes

• Understanding functional areas and challenges • 30 minutes
• Effective communication and information sharing • 30 minutes
• Managing conflict and problem solving • 30 minutes
• Leveraging diverse perspectives • 30 minutes
• Cultivating effective teamwork • 30 minutes

1 assignment • Total 180 minutes

• Final Assessment • 180 minutes

Our purpose at Starweaver is to empower individuals and organizations with practical knowledge and skills for a rapidly transforming world. By collaborating with an extensive, global network of proven expert educators, we deliver engaging, information-rich learning experiences that work to revolutionize lives and careers. Committed to our belief that people are the most valuable asset, we focus on building capabilities to navigate ever evolving challenges in technology, business, and design.

Recommended if you're interested in Business Essentials

Alfaisal University | KLD

الاعتراف بالإيراد | Revenue Recognition

تقييم واستحواذ الشركات | Valuing and Acquiring a Business

Google Cloud

Introduction to Image Generation - 简体中文

البطالة | Unemployment

Why people choose coursera for their career.

New to Business Essentials? Start here.

Open new doors with Coursera Plus

Unlimited access to 7,000+ world-class courses, hands-on projects, and job-ready certificate programs - all included in your subscription

Advance your career with an online degree

Earn a degree from world-class universities - 100% online

Join over 3,400 global companies that choose Coursera for Business

Upskill your employees to excel in the digital economy

Frequently asked questions

When will i have access to the lectures and assignments.

Access to lectures and assignments depends on your type of enrollment. If you take a course in audit mode, you will be able to see most course materials for free. To access graded assignments and to earn a Certificate, you will need to purchase the Certificate experience, during or after your audit. If you don't see the audit option:

The course may not offer an audit option. You can try a Free Trial instead, or apply for Financial Aid.

The course may offer 'Full Course, No Certificate' instead. This option lets you see all course materials, submit required assessments, and get a final grade. This also means that you will not be able to purchase a Certificate experience.

What will I get if I purchase the Certificate?

When you purchase a Certificate you get access to all course materials, including graded assignments. Upon completing the course, your electronic Certificate will be added to your Accomplishments page - from there, you can print your Certificate or add it to your LinkedIn profile. If you only want to read and view the course content, you can audit the course for free.

What is the refund policy?

You will be eligible for a full refund until two weeks after your payment date, or (for courses that have just launched) until two weeks after the first session of the course begins, whichever is later. You cannot receive a refund once you’ve earned a Course Certificate, even if you complete the course within the two-week refund period. See our full refund policy Opens in a new tab .

Is financial aid available?

Yes. In select learning programs, you can apply for financial aid or a scholarship if you can’t afford the enrollment fee. If fin aid or scholarship is available for your learning program selection, you’ll find a link to apply on the description page.

More questions

Jump to content

Psychiatry Academy

Bookmark/search this post.

You are here

Collaborative problem solving.

• Register/Take course

At Think:Kids at Massachusetts General Hospital (https://thinkkids.org/) we transform the lives of kids and families by spreading a more accurate and empathic view of children with challenging behavior. We do this by teaching adults our revolutionary, evidence-based Collaborative Problem Solving® (CPS) approach. CPS is an approach to responding to challenging behavior that promotes the understanding that kids with behavioral challenges lack the skill—not the will—to behave ; specifically, skills related to problem-solving, flexibility, and frustration tolerance.

Research has shown that CPS reduces challenging behavior, stress levels, and punitive responses and teaches kids the skills they lack while building helping relationships with adults in their lives. Unlike traditional discipline models, the CPS approach avoids using power, control, and motivational procedures. Instead, it focuses on collaborating with kids to solve the problems leading to their challenging behavior and build the skills they need to succeed.

*PLEASE NOTE* Collaborative Problem Solving is not for CME credit.

Collaborative Problem Solving® Tier 1 Training: Essential Foundation 

Tier 1 training covers all aspects of the evidence-based CPS approach, including assessment, planning, and intervention, as well as the neurobiology behind the approach.

Collaborative Problem Solving® Tier 2 Training: Advanced Concepts

Tier 2 training deepens skills at all phases of the approach, enhances implementation in the real world, including in group and emergency situations, and discusses how to use CPS to enhance cultural responsiveness. A focus on deepening skills at all phases of the approach and enhancing implementation in the real world.

Target Audience

This program is intended for professionals from different disciplines related to child mental health. This includes physicians, psychologists, social workers, licensed mental health counselors and nurses.

Learning Objectives

By the end of this training, participants will be able to:

• Understand why traditional approaches may not be well suited to the needs of children with social, emotional, and behavioral challenges.
• Learn the philosophy of the CPS approach.
• Identify the five cognitive skills that are frequently lacking in kids with challenging behaviors.
• Develop expectations for youth that are realistic and age appropriate.
• Know when to use the three primary interventions based on the goal at hand.
• Learn how CPS operationalizes the latest research on trauma-informed care.

By the end of this training, participants will be able to: 

• Troubleshoot all aspects of CPS, even in the most challenging situations.
• Utilize CPS in group settings, emergency, and spontaneous situations.
• Apply CPS in a neuro-biologically informed manner.
• Work with other adults who are rooted in conventional wisdom.
• Use CPS to enhance cultural responsiveness.
• Identify strategies for ongoing learning and application at home, work, and in larger systems.

Collaborative Problem Solving® Tier 1 Training: Essential Foundation

Tier 1 In-Person Schedule:

Coaching Schedule Group 1 (Virtual)

Zoom Room:   https://partners.zoom.us/j/83621462450?pwd=M3pPVVZkb00rUkFIQjV4dkEvajdxdz09 

Password: CPS

Coaching Schedule Group 2 (Virtual)

Zoom Room: https://partners.zoom.us/j/85600268527?pwd=aGZxa1ZFdGhVa2wzdzNOZTF2dW1oQT09

Tier 2 In- Person Schedule

Stuart Ablon, PhD

Heather johnson, phd.

(951) 827-5582

Efficient & Effective School-Based Problem-Solving Teams

About PST 1-2-3

PST 1-2-3 provides explicit yet flexible guidance to educators as they engage in team-based problem-solving and data-based decision-making activities to address challenges facing students, staff, classrooms, buildings, and districts within tiered service delivery models. PST 1-2-3 draws from core problem-solving components, behavioral consultation processes, and practical, real-world experiences to address frequent barriers to ineffectiveness and inefficient SB PST. PST 1-2-3 uses structured agendas, repetition and consistency, time limits, and deemphasis of prior training or experience to address barriers to success such as resistance, inconsistency, poor training, and lack of knowledge or skills relative to intervention, supports, data-collection, or problem-solving. Since initial pilot implementation in 2008, PST 1-2-3 has been refined through incorporating additional research and theory, feedback from users, and outcomes for students. The effectiveness of PST 1-2-3 is rooted in its unique features. PST 1-2-3 requires little training for most participants, it uses a consistent 3-meeting cycle, and activities are driven by simple, structured, time-bound agendas.  

The primary emphasis of PST 1-2-3 is to promote collaborative problem analysis and problem-solving while downplaying the individual, expert-driven approach to intervention inherent in a diagnosis-driven medical model of service delivery. In the PST 1-2-3 process, the “expert” is the person charged with ensuring the integrity of the PST 1-2-3 process. In keeping with a collaborative, collectivist, and non-expert driven problem-solving approach, PST 1-2-3 meetings serve as organizational tools for activities to be executed following meetings. The underlying rationale for this approach is that meetings themselves (i.e., meeting with experts) do not address problems; real problem-solving or intervention efforts are the actions carried out following the meetings. To this end, a hallmark feature of PST 1-2-3 is the dedicated time, following the initial meeting spent researching possible problem solutions. This prevents teams from (overly) relying on the meeting experts to generate on-the-spot solutions to identified problems. This mechanism also serves to broaden all team members skills in identifying evidence-based interventions for a variety of problems (i.e., doing intervention research) and broadening awareness of specific evidence-based practices in generally. Guidance from the PST 1-2-3 facilitator and other team members in conducting this and other problem-solving activities allows participants to learn by doing, thus eliminating the need for exhaustive, sit-and-get training. 

Supporting the consistency and repetition and decreasing the burden of training is the overall format of PST 1-2-3. PST 1-2-3 employs a three-meeting cycle to established problem-solving activities as a linear process rather than a singular event. Each meeting follows a specific agenda that results in explicit actions, roles, and responsibilities for some or all team members that will be completed. Teams work through steps, including functional problem definition, baseline data collection, intervention selection, progress monitoring, implementation fidelity checks, and data-based decision in a very structured, organized, and efficient manner. Within a problem-solving approach, to increase the likelihood of problem remediation, some problem-solving steps must occur prior to others. For example, problem identification, definition, and analysis must occur prior to identification of possible problem solutions. It is impossible to identify and select an evidence-based intervention for a problem that has not been identified. Similarly, the importance of problem identification extends to collection of baseline and progress monitoring data. It would likely be frustrating to collect baseline data using reading fluency probes only to discover later that the difficult facing the student was in the area of Math. In short, problem-solving is time bound and linear process, which requires planning, organization, forethought, and commitment for success. It is imperative that this process occur in a sequential fashion to preserve the ability of collaborators to make high-quality, informed data-based decision.

Finally, PST 1-2-3 is based on a simple, yet effective technique used by numerous professions to eliminate natural, expected human error. No matter the level of training or education, on any given day, our intelligence, or training can fail, if only momentarily. To combat this human condition, physicians, engineers, pilots, and others use checklists and repetition to increase the integrity in executing steps in processes and procedures essential to success. The PST 1-2-3 process applies a checklist-structured, consistent problem-solving model and incorporates function-based problem definition and intervention selection in addressing difficulties exhibited by students in any subject area and at any grade or support level. The model allows team members to work through the problem-solving process in an organized, structured manner incorporating through support, practice, and frequent repetition. This process allows repetition of the same processes and procedures within RTI/MTSS service delivery models across all tiers and is designed to be used to address system, building, group, or individual level problems. This consistency in process is designed to promote fluency in problem-solving PST 1-2-3 emphasizes process over problem. This is to say different problems require different solutions, not different processes (or people or experts) to identify and implement possible solutions. Within the PST 1-2-3 process, procedures do not change, only the student(s) or classroom, the identified problem, and possible solutions (evidence-based interventions) will change. The PST 1-2-3 process has been designed to adapt to such differences while maintaining consistence across executing the steps necessary for quality problem-solving and associated data-based decision making.     

Copyright © 2012 PST 1-2-3 All Rights Reserved.

Powered by GoDaddy Website Builder

• Learn Collaborative Problem Solving »
• Essential Foundation in Collaborative Problem Solving »

Essential Foundation in Collaborative Problem Solving

The Essential Foundation (Level 1) course covers all aspects of the Collaborative Problem Solving approach. Through lectures, role-play, video examples, case studies, and breakout groups, participants learn how to identify what’s really causing unmet expectations and challenging behavior and how to address those causes using a relational and replicable process. After completing the course, participants are eligible to take Advanced Concepts in Collaborative Problem Solving (Level 2).

Upon completion, you will be able to:

• Describe why a new approach is needed for working with individuals with challenging behaviors.
• Explain that a person's behavior is influenced by their thinking skills rather than their motivation to behave well
• Understand that implicit bias may impact judgment about a person's behavior.
• Differentiate between problems to be solved and challenging behaviors when doing a Collaborative Problem Solving Assessment.
• Identify how responses to situations are consistent with Plan A, Plan B, and Plan C.
• Use Collaborative Problem Solving to build skills and address problems, not just challenging behaviors.
• Solve problems collaboratively with others.

Upcoming Sessions

Collaborative problem solving essential foundation | may 2024 | ce / pdp, collaborative problem solving essential foundation | july 2024 | ce / pdp, if the above days and times don't work for you, please submit this form to let us know what would work best for your schedule and we will be in touch when a class meets your schedule needs., additional information, earn ce and pdp credits in public training, think:kids/mgh is an accredited provider of continuing education (ce) credit and professional development points (pdp). this public course offers 12 continuing education credits/professional development points. learn how to get credit >>, meet the instructors, our collaborative problem solving essential foundation course is taught by our experienced trainers ., important information, financial assistance:  if you require financial assistance, please  apply for assistance by completing this form . funds are limited, and the application does not guarantee an award., payment: credit/debit card is preferred for registration payment. please email us at [email protected] if you need to pay by check/invoice., cancellation: non-refundable. substitutions are permitted., prerequisite: introduction to collaborative problem solving is highly recommended. , attendance: when registering, you are signing up for all sessions. attendance is required for each day as the learning builds upon the previous session's content., participation: all participants must join via their own devices . if joining as a group, each person should be on an individual device., host a private training, if your organization is interested in hosting a private in-person or online training for your employees, please get in touch with us to learn about our customized training options, what our clients say, privacy overview.

Game-based collaborative decision-making training: a framework and behavior analysis for a remote collaborative decision-making skill training game using multidimensional scaffolding

• Published: 20 March 2024

Cite this article

• Chih-Chen Kuo 1 &
• Huei-Tse Hou 1 , 2  

120 Accesses

Explore all metrics

Decision-making is considered an essential competence of the twenty-first century skills. Remote synchronous collaborative problem-solving has gained much attention especially for decision-making training. We designed a framework to promote decision-making training with a multidimensional scaffolding-based game, and 84 participants were recruited online to evaluate the game based on the proposed framework. The quasi-experimental study compared collaborative and individual learners’ game performance, anxiety, motivation, acceptance, behavior patterns, and perceived learning process for decision-making.

The result showed that both collaborative and individual learners had low anxiety, high motivation, and high acceptance in the multidimensional scaffolding-based online educational game; however, the collaborative team had better game performance and found the clues to be more useful for the learning process than the individual team did. Behavioral pattern analysis revealed that the high-performance collaborative team had more well-organized problem-solving and in-depth reflection.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

The Gamification of Learning: a Meta-analysis

Gamification Applications in E-learning: A Literature Review

Game-Based Learning

Data availability.

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, upon reasonable request.

Al-araibi, A.A.M., Mahrin, M.N.R.B., Yusoff, R.C.M.: Technological aspect factors of E-learning readiness in higher education institutions: Delphi technique. Educ. Inf. Technol. 24 (1), 567–590 (2019)

Article   Google Scholar  

Aldoayan, M., Sahandi, R., John, D., & Cetinkaya, D. (2019, March). Collaborative cloud-based online courses: Issues and challenges. In  Proceedings of the 2019 8th International Conference on Educational and Information Technology  (pp. 17–21).

Almaiah, M.A., Almulhem, A.: A conceptual framework for determining the success factors of e-learning system implementation using Delphi technique. J. Theor. Appl. Inf. Technol. 96 (17), 5962–5976 (2018)

Google Scholar  

Alomari, H. W., Ramasamy, V., Kiper, J. D., & Potvin, G. (2020). A User Interface (UI) and User eXperience (UX) evaluation framework for cyberlearning environments in computer science and software engineering education.  Heliyon ,  6 (5).

Altun, S.A., Kalayci, E., Avci, U.: Integrating ICT at the Faculty Level: A Case Study. Turkish online journal of educational technology-TOJET 10 (4), 230–240 (2011)

Arnab, S., Lim, T., Carvalho, M. B., Bellotti, F., De Freitas, S., Louchart, S., ... & De Gloria, A. (2015). Mapping learning and game mechanics for serious games analysis. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(2), 391–411.

Aronsson, S., Artman, H., Brynielsson, J., Lindquist, S., Ramberg, R.: Design of simulator training: a comparative study of Swedish dynamic decision-making training facilities. Cogn. Technol. Work 23 (1), 117–130 (2021)

Azir, I.D.A.: Applying peer scaffolding to enhance the EFL vocational students’ speaking skills. Ethical Lingua: Journal of Language Teaching and Literature 6 (2), 149–157 (2019)

Bai, S., Hew, K.F., Huang, B.: Does gamification improve student learning outcome? Evidence from a meta-analysis and synthesis of qualitative data in educational contexts. Educ. Res. Rev. 30 , 100322 (2020)

Barron, B.: Achieving coordination in collaborative problem-solving groups. J. Learn. Sci. 9 (4), 403–436 (2000)

Bakeman, R., & Gottman, J. (1997). Observing interaction: An introduction to sequential analysis (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Bos, N., & Shami, N. S. (2006). Adapting a face-to-face role-playing simulation for

online play. Educational Technology Research and Development, 54(5), 493–521.

Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of

learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42.

Byrnes, J. P. (2013). The nature and development of decision-making: A self-regulation model. Psychology Press.

Cheng, Y. P., Shen, P. D., Hung, M. L., Tsai, C. W., Lin, C. H., & Hsu, L. C. (2021). Applying online content-based knowledge awareness and team learning to develop students’ programming skills, reduce their anxiety, and regulate cognitive load in a cloud classroom.  Universal Access in the Information Society , 1–16.

Carbajal-Carrera, B.: Mapping connections among activism interactional practices and presence in videoconferencing language learning. System 99 , 102527 (2021)

Care, E., Scoular, C., Griffin, P.: Assessment of collaborative problem solving in education environments. Appl. Measur. Educ. 29 (4), 250–264 (2016)

Carey, E., Hill, F., Devine, A., Szűcs, D.: The modified abbreviated math anxiety scale: A valid and reliable instrument for use with children. Front. Psychol. 8 , 11 (2017)

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Charsky, D., Ressler, W.: “Games are made for fun”: Lessons on the effects of concept maps in the classroom use of computer games. Comput. Educ. 56 (3), 604–615 (2011)

Chang, C.H.S., Kuo, C.C., Hou, H.T., Koe, J.J.Y.: Design and evaluation of a multi-sensory scaffolding gamification science course with mobile technology for learners with total blindness. Comput. Hum. Behav. 128 , 107085 (2022)

Chang, C. J., Chang, M. H., Liu, C. C., Chiu, B. C., Fan Chiang, S. H., Wen, C. T., ... & Chai, C. S. (2017). An analysis of collaborative problem‐solving activities mediated by individual‐based and collaborative computer simulations. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 33(6), 649–662.

Chen, L. C. (2008). Motivational Analysis of Library Instruction among College Students [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Fu Jen Catholic University

Chen, C.H., Law, V.: Scaffolding individual and collaborative game-based learning in learning performance and intrinsic motivation. Comput. Hum. Behav. 55 , 1201–1212 (2016)

Chen, H.R., Lin, Y.S.: An examination of digital game-based situated learning applied to Chinese language poetry education. Technol. Pedagog. Educ. 25 (2), 171–186 (2016)

Chi, M.T., Wylie, R.: The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational psychologist 49 (4), 219–243 (2014)

Clinton, B.D., Kohlmeyer, J.M.: The effects of group quizzes on performance and motivation to learn: Two experiments in cooperative learning. J. Account. Educ. 23 (2), 96–116 (2005)

Cooper, D.J., Kagel, J.H.: Are two heads better than one? Team versus individual play in signaling games. Amer. Econ. Rev. 95 , 477–509 (2005)

Crawford, J., Butler-Henderson, K., Rudolph, J., Malkawi, B., Glowatz, M., Burton, R., ... & Lam, S. (2020). COVID-19: 20 countries' higher education intra-period digital pedagogy responses. Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching, 3(1), 1–20.

Davis, F.: Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q. 13 (3), 319–340 (1989)

De Haan, G.: The development of ESD-related competencies in supportive institutional frameworks. Int. Rev. Educ. 56 (2), 315–328 (2010)

Dondlinger, M.J., Wilson, D.A.: Creating an alternate reality: Critical, creative, and empathic thinking generated in the Global Village Playground capstone experience. Thinking Skills and Creativity 7 (3), 153–164 (2012)

Erhel, S., Jamet, E.: Digital game-based learning: Impact of instructions and feedback on motivation and learning effectiveness. Comput. Educ. 67 , 156–167 (2013)

Evans, C. M. (2020). Measuring Student Success Skills: A Review of the Literature on Collaboration. 21st Century Success Skills.  National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment .

Fleiss, J.L., Levin, B., Paik, M.C.: The measurement of interrater agreement. Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions 2 (212–236), 22–23 (1981)

Gijlers, H., Saab, N., Van Joolingen, W.R., De Jong, T., Van Hout-Wolters, B.H.A.M.: Interaction between tool and talk: How instruction and tools support consensus building in collaborative inquiry-learning environments. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 25 , 252–267 (2009)

Hainey, T., Connolly, T.M., Boyle, E.A., Wilson, A., Razak, A.: A systematic literature review of games-based learning empirical evidence in primary education. Comput. Educ. 102 , 202–223 (2016)

Hao, J., Liu, L., von Davier, A., & Kyllonen, P. (2015).Assessing collaborative problem solving with simulation based task. In Proceedings of the 11th international conference on computer supported collaborative learning, Gothenburg, Sweden, 7–11 June.

Hartley, C.A., Phelps, E.A.: Anxiety and decision-making. Biol. Psychiat. 72 (2), 113–118 (2012)

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Hou, H. T., Fang, Y. S., & Tang, J. T. (2021). Designing an alternate reality board game with augmented reality and multi-dimensional scaffolding for promoting spatial and logical ability. Interactive Learning Environments, 1–21.

Hou, H.T.: Integrating cluster and sequential analysis to explore learners’ flow and behavioral patterns in a simulation game with situated-learning context for science courses: A video-based process exploration. Comput. Hum. Behav. 48 , 424–435 (2015)

Hou, H. T., Kuo C. C., & Wang, T. S. (2021) The Development and Preliminary Evaluation Learner’s Flow State of an Online Decision-making Detective Game, paper presented at the 13th Asian Conference on Education (ACE2021), Japan, November 25–28, 2021, Tokyo, Japan

Hou, H.T., Wu, C.S., Wu, C.H.: Evaluation of a mobile-based scaffolding board game developed by scaffolding-based game editor: analysis of learners’ performance, anxiety and behavior patterns. Journal of Computers in Education 10 (2), 273–291 (2023)

Hsieh, Y.H., Lin, Y.C., Hou, H.T.: Exploring the role of flow experience, learning performance and potential behavior clusters in elementary students’ game-based learning. Interact. Learn. Environ. 24 (1), 178–193 (2016)

Hodges, B.D., Albert, M., Arweiler, D., Akseer, S., Bandiera, G., Byrne, N., Reeves, S.: The future of medical education: a Canadian environmental scan. Med. Educ. 45 (1), 95–106 (2011)

Hooshyar, D., Pedaste, M., Yang, Y., Malva, L., Hwang, G. J., Wang, M., ... & Delev, D. (2021). From gaming to computational thinking: An adaptive educational computer game-based learning approach.  Journal of Educational Computing Research ,  59 (3), 383–409.

Hwang, G.J., Wu, P.H., Chen, C.C.: An online game approach for improving students’ learning performance in web-based problem-solving activities. Comput. Educ. 59 (4), 1246–1256 (2012)

Hwang, G.J., Sung, H.Y., Hung, C.M., Huang, I.: Development of a individualized educational computer game based on students’ learning styles. Education Tech. Research Dev. 60 (4), 623–638 (2012)

Ji, H., Park, S., Shin, H.W.: Investigating the link between engagement, readiness, and satisfaction in a synchronous online second language learning environment. System 105 , 102720 (2022)

Kang, J., An, D., Yan, L., & Liu, M. (2019). Collaborative Problem-Solving Process in a Science Serious Game: Exploring Group Action Similarity Trajectory. International Educational Data Mining Society, 12th, Montreal, Canada, Jul 2–5.

Kelly, T.L.: The selection of upper and lower groups for the validation of testitems. J. Educ. Psychol. 30 , 17–24 (1939)

Keller, J.M.: Development and use of the ARCS model of instructional design. J. Instr. Dev. 10 (3), 2–10 (1987)

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Kirschner, P.A., Sweller, J., Kirschner, F., Zambrano, R., J.: From cognitive load theory to collaborative cognitive load theory. Int. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn. 13 (2), 213–233 (2018)

Klaczynski, P.A., Byrnes, J.P., Jacobs, J.E.: Introduction to the special issue: The development of decision making. J. Appl. Dev. Psychol. 22 (3), 225–236 (2001)

Kocher, M., Strauß, S., Sutter, M.: Individual or team decision-making—causes and consequences of self-selection. Games Econom. Behav. 56 (2), 259–270 (2006)

Kuo, Y.C., Walker, A.E., Belland, B.R., Schroder, K.E., Kuo, Y.T.: A case study of integrating Interwise: Interaction, internet self-efficacy, and satisfaction in synchronous online learning environments. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning 15 (1), 161–181 (2014)

Lameras, P., Arnab, S., Dunwell, I., Stewart, C., Clarke, S., Petridis, P.: Essential features of serious games design in higher education: Linking learning attributes to game mechanics. Br. J. Edu. Technol. 48 (4), 972–994 (2017)

Lin, P.C., Hou, H.T., Wu, S.Y., Chang, K.E.: Exploring college students’ cognitive processing patterns during a collaborative problem-solving teaching activity integrating Facebook discussion and simulation tools. The Internet and Higher Education 22 , 51–56 (2014)

Lin, Y. C., & Hou, H. T. (2023). Designing a Strategic Analysis and Planning Skills Training Board Game Using Mobile Technology and a Dual-Scaffolding Mechanism.  The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher , 1–15.

Luin, B., & Brcko, T. (2016). Framework for simulation of collision avoidance strategies. In 24th International Symposium on Electronics in Transport ISEP Ljubljana, Slovenia.

Maheu-Cadotte, M. A., Cossette, S., Dubé, V., Fontaine, G., Mailhot, T., Lavoie, P., ... & Mathieu-Dupuis, G. (2018). Effectiveness of serious games and impact of design elements on engagement and educational outcomes in healthcare professionals and students: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol. BMJ open, 8(3), e019871.

Maryam, B., Sören, H., Gunilla, L.: Putting scaffolding into action: Preschool teachers’ actions using interactive whiteboard. Early Childhood Educ. J. 48 (1), 79–92 (2020)

Mayer, R.E., Johnson, C.I.: Adding instructional features that promote learning in a game-like environment. Journal of Educational Computing Research 42 (3), 241–265 (2010)

Mayer, R.E.: Introduction to multimedia learning. In: Mayer, R.E. (ed.) The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning, pp. 1–24. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY (2014)

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Moreland, R. L., Levine, J. M., & Wingert, M. L. (2013). Creating the ideal group: composition effects at work. In: E. H. Witte & J. H. Davis (Eds.), Understanding group behavior: small group process and interpersonal relations (Vol. 2, pp. 11–35). Psychology Press.

Morgan, P.M., Tindale, R.S.: Group vs individual performance in mixed-motive situations: Exploring an inconsistency. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 87 (1), 44–65 (2002)

Molenaar, I., van Boxtel, C.A.M., Sleegers, P.J.C.: The effects of scaffolding metacognitive activities in small groups. Comput. Hum. Behav. 26 (6), 1727–1738 (2010)

Plass, J.L., Homer, B.D., Kinzer, C.K.: Foundations of game-based learning. Educational psychologist 50 (4), 258–283 (2015)

Plisorn, W., & Piriyasurawong, P. (2019). Model of intelligent cloud learning system to develop digital literacy and collaborative learning skills.  วารสาร วิชาการ พระจอมเกล้า พระนครเหนือ ,  29 (3), 518–526.

Ramírez, E., Ortega, A.R., Del Paso, G.A.R.: Anxiety, attention, and decision making: The moderating role of heart rate variability. Int. J. Psychophysiol. 98 (3), 490–496 (2015)

Rivera-Vargas, P., Anderson, T., Cano, C.A.: Exploring students’ learning experience in online education: analysis and improvement proposals based on the case of a Spanish open learning university. Education Tech. Research Dev. 69 (6), 3367–3389 (2021)

Russell, D., & Laffey, J. M. (2016). Handbook of Research on Gaming Trends in P-12 Education: Vol. i (1st ed.). IGI Global.

Roungas, B., & Meijer, S. (2020, November). Towards the Management and Dissemination of Knowledge from Gaming Simulations. In Joint International Conference on Serious Games (pp. 276–288). Springer, Cham.

Sun, C., Shute, V.J., Stewart, A.E., Beck-White, Q., Reinhardt, C.R., Zhou, G., Duran, N., D’Mello, S.K.: The relationship between collaborative problem solving behaviors and solution outcomes in a game-based learning environment. Comput. Hum. Behav. 128 , 107120 (2022)

Tapingkae, P., Panjaburee, P., Hwang, G.J., Srisawasdi, N.: Effects of a formative assessment-based contextual gaming approach on students’ digital citizenship behaviours, learning motivations, and perceptions. Comput. Educ. 159 , 103998 (2020)

Türkistanli, T.T., Kuleyin, B.: Game-based learning for better decision-making: A collision prevention training for maritime transportation engineering students. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 30 (3), 917–933 (2022)

Verkijika, S.F., De Wet, L.: Using a brain-computer interface (BCI) in reducing math anxiety: Evidence from South Africa. Comput. Educ. 81 , 113–122 (2015)

Vermillion, S. D., Malak, R. J., Smallman, R., Becker, B., Sferra, M., & Fields, S. (2017). An investigation on using serious gaming to study human decision-making in engineering contexts. Design Science, 3.

Vosniadou, S. (2001). Conceptual change research and the teaching of science. In Research in science education-past, present, and future (pp. 177–188). Springer, Dordrecht.

Vygotsky, L.: Interaction between learning and development. Read. Dev. Child. 23 (3), 34–41 (1978)

Wang, L.C., Chen, M.P.: The effects of game strategy and preference-matching on flow experience and programming performance in game-based learning. Innov. Educ. Teach. Int. 47 (1), 39–52 (2010)

Wang, X., Goh, D.H.L., Lim, E.P.: Understanding Continuance Intention toward Crowdsourcing Games: A Longitudinal Investigation. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 36 (12), 1168–1177 (2020)

Weinberger, A., Stegmann, K., Fischer, F.: Learning to argue online: Scripted groups surpass individuals (unscripted groups do not). Comput. Hum. Behav. 26 , 506–515 (2010)

Wishart, J.M., Oades, C.E., Morris, M.: Using online role play to teach internet safety awareness. Comput. Educ. 48 (3), 460–473 (2007)

Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17, 89—100.

Yang, J.C., Lin, M.Y.D., Chen, S.Y.: Effects of anxiety levels on learning performance and gaming performance in digital game-based learning. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 34 (3), 324–334 (2018)

Yang, Y. F., Goh, A. P., Hong, Y. C., & Chen, N. S. (2021). Primary school students’ foreign language anxiety in collaborative and individual digital game-based learning.  Computer Assisted Language Learning , 1–21.

Young, M.F., Slota, S., Cutter, A.B., Jalette, G., Mullin, G., Lai, B., et al.: Our princess is in another castle: a review of trends in serious gaming for education. Rev. Educ. Res. 82 , 61–89 (2012)

Zhang, M., Quintana, C.: Scaffolding strategies for supporting middle school students’ online inquiry processes. Comput. Educ. 58 (1), 181–196 (2012)

Download references

This research was supported by the projects from the US Air Force Office of Scientific Research (AFOSR) project (20IOA038) and the Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan, under contract number MOST-110–2511-H-011-004-MY3 and MOST-111–2410-H-011-004-MY3.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Graduate Institute of Applied Science and Technology, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Address: #43 Keelung Road, Sect. 4, Taipei, Taiwan

Chih-Chen Kuo & Huei-Tse Hou

Empower Vocational Education Research Center, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Address: #43 Keelung Road, Sect. 4, Taipei, Taiwan

Huei-Tse Hou

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Chih-Chen Kuo helped in formal analysis, investigation, and writing— original draft. Huei-Tse Hou* worked in supervision, conceptualization, methodology, and writing—reviewing and editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Huei-Tse Hou .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Kuo, CC., Hou, HT. Game-based collaborative decision-making training: a framework and behavior analysis for a remote collaborative decision-making skill training game using multidimensional scaffolding. Univ Access Inf Soc (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-024-01103-4

Download citation

Accepted : 05 February 2024

Published : 20 March 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-024-01103-4

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Collaborative problem-solving
• Scaffolding
• Decision-making training
• Educational game
• Behavioral pattern
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Front Psychol

Effects of Online Cooperative Learning on Students’ Problem-Solving Ability and Learning Satisfaction

Yi-ping wang.

1 College of International Relations, Huaqiao University, Xiamen, China

2 School of Management, Harbin Institute of Technology (HIT), Harbin, China

Associated Data

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/Supplementary Material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

As technology changes, it is becoming more common in education for students to acquire knowledge from sources other than just their teachers. In the face of a diverse student background, teachers have to make adjustments in their instruction so that students do not simply listen. Student-based educational philosophy aims to combine instructional methods with cooperative learning to allow students to change from passive learning to active knowledge construction, reinduce students’ learning motivation and passion, and enhance students’ self-learning effectiveness. Focusing on college students in Fujian Province as the research sample, 360 copies of a questionnaire were distributed for this study. After deducting invalid and incomplete ones, 298 copies remained, with a retrieval rate 83%. The research results showed significantly positive correlations between online cooperative learning and problem-solving ability, problem-solving ability and learning satisfaction, and online cooperative learning and learning satisfaction. According to the results, it is expected, in the digital era, to integrate information technology into the teaching environment and focus on learning objectives to create teaching software with a user-friendly interface, simple operation, learning process recording, and an interactive learning community in the teaching-learning process to develop the characteristics and effectiveness of digital teaching and learning.

Introduction

As times progress and technology improves, teachers are no longer the only channel for students acquiring knowledge. Students in this generation are stimulated by distinct and diverse cultures to show more active and flexible characters or responses than students before them, and are even brave enough to challenge existing values. Students in a traditional learning model with passive lectures will not concentrate in the classroom. Examinations have been a core part of education for a long time. It is the best time to practice cooperative learning. The curricula show that the ideas such as taking the initiative, engaging in the public, and seeking the common good are important. Engaging in the public and seeking the common good is a result of the characters of positive independence and face-to-face fostering of interactive and interpersonal skills mentioned in cooperative learning. In this respect, it can be stated that cooperative learning guides students to be well and develops various interactive abilities with ego, others, society, and nature. It also helps students in applying and practicing their knowledge, experiencing the meaning of life, being willing to devote to the sustainable development of society, nature, and culture, and seeking reciprocity of each other and common good. Information technologies are material tools that learners should actively and broadly apply to a the positive interaction channel between oneself and the environment to effectively engage the public with others and the environment ( Li et al., 2021 ).

In the face of diverse student background, teachers have to make adjustments in their instruction to stop students from simply listening. Educational philosophy should be student-based to promote each student’s thinking. In this case, cooperative learning allows students to change from passive learning into active knowledge construction, could reinduce students’ learning motivation and passion, and enhance students’ self-learning effectiveness. Most students are digital natives born after 1980, while most of their teachers are digital immigrants and even “digital refugees” escaping from technologies and being afraid of new knowledge. The overlap between such two generations is limited, meaning that their values and morality are distinct. Modern students are digital natives able to use mobile phones, televisions, computers, laptops, and tablets since childhood, and highly dependent on new technologies. Information-technology-integrated instruction with multimedia equipment and materials means teaching and learning is no longer restricted to dictation and paper-and-pencil ( Vaz et al., 2021 ); the class climate has changed to cooperative learning. The operation of cooperative learning is smoother through information technology, and a communication and interaction bridge can be built through information technology so that cooperative learning could cultivate students’ problem-solving ability to further promote learning satisfaction. As a result, the effects of online cooperative learning on students’ problem-solving ability and learning satisfaction are discussed in this study, expecting to integrate information technology into the teaching environment in the digital era, focus on learning objectives based on learning theory, have teaching software with a user-friendly interface, simple operation, learning process recording, and an interactive learning community in the teaching-learning process to develop the characteristics and effectiveness of digital teaching and learning.

Literature Review and Hypothesis

Constructivists regard gaining knowledge as a comprehensive and reflective thinking activity through students’ independent exploration and observation and highly praise learner-centered learning environments. Teachers’ roles of propagating the doctrine, imparting professional knowledge, and resolving doubts change into knowledge building facilitators. The superordinate-subordinate relationship of “Learning from Teacher” is changed into the equal relationship of “Learning with Teacher.” The learning perspective of constructivism facilitates the development of current learning technology ( Cortez et al., 2021 ).

Dozens of instructional strategies are developed for cooperative learning, and each grouping method presents the characteristics and applicable teaching situation. Teachers could flexibly apply the difference according to instructional objectives, student characteristics, and course attributes. Researchers, in the interview with collaborative teachers, also reveal not being restricted into a grouping method, but extracting the advantages of various methods, and making flexible adjustments in consideration of teachers’ personality traits and class attributes and characteristics ( Akdemir et al., 2020 ). Major cooperative learning strategies are classified into three types, including one suitable for leading sharing and discussion among students, another for assisting students in mastering learning content, and the last for leading teams for theme-based inquiry. Each type shows various strategies to cope with different teaching styles, or more than two strategies could be changed and applied depending on the demands ( Hafeez, 2021 ).

Li and Keller (2018) mentioned the significant effects of using web problem-based cooperative learning and on the problem-solving skills of the children. The results revealed the better performance of students compared to traditional problem-based learning. Del Gaudio et al. (2021) used online cooperative learning to discover the advantages and strengths, solve problems according to collaborative interaction, comprehend the roles, integrate the discussed ideas, clearly master the tasks, coordinate the allocation of team members’ reports, complete reports according to previous discussion results, discuss and modify successive measures together, inspect cooperation results, track back problem-solving processes, and reflect team organization and roles, problem-solving ability as to independently complete tasks with high-level thinking, and cooperative problem-solving ability as to create the value of synergy, solve problems and complete tasks together, and create good performance beyond the expectation ( Wu et al., 2019 , 2022 ). Ingrid (2019) explained that independent thinking and analysis ability allowed dealing with daily life and even life problems. Teachers applying information technology to cooperative learning to enrich students’ life experience, being good at asking questions, creating problem-solving teaching situations, applying technological tools to speculate and deduce problems, effectively solving problems with cooperative discussions, and enhancing adaptability to life could help students become problem-solving experts. For this reason, the following hypothesis is established in this study.

H1 : Online cooperative learning presents significantly positive correlations with problem-solving ability. H1-1 : Online cooperative learning shows significantly positive correlations with problem-solving ability. H1-2 : Online cooperative learning reveals remarkably negative correlations with problems-solving ability.

Oates and Ritók (2018) explained that learners being able to effectively enhance their problem-solving ability after going through the curriculum arranged by the school, course content of teachers, and effective promotion of knowledge acquisition in the learning process, with consistent expectation and anticipation, would appear satisfactory; on the contrary, dissatisfaction would be delivered. Metin-Orta and Demirtepe-Saygılı (2021) stated that education aimed to help individuals live their life; in real situations, an individual using critical thinking to solve complicated and messy dilemmas and problems was the core task of modern education. Teachers in the teaching process did not simply transmit knowledge, provide guidance for study, and dispel confusion, but had to help students associate old experience with new knowledge to further solve problems through tight cognition structure to form meaningful learning in order to effectively enhance learning satisfaction. Wu et al. (2021) regarded cooperative problem-solving ability as an individual with sufficient ability communicating and dialoging with more than two companions to share knowledge and skills, collaboratively and effectively participate in an activity, and develop teamwork ability to solve problems. Collaborative problem solving referred to several partners collaboratively completing a task where each partner had to positively participate ( Chiao and MacVaugh, 2021 ; Min et al., 2021 ), mutually coordinate, and pull together to solve problems in the task with teamwork so as to effectively enhance learning satisfaction. Accordingly, the following hypothesis is establishment in this study.

H2 : Problem-solving ability shows remarkably positive correlations with learning satisfaction. H2-1 : Problem-solving ability appears to have notably positive correlations with learning satisfaction. H2-2 : Problem-solving ability presents significantly negative correlations with learning satisfaction.

Wu et al. (2020) applied interactive APP to analyze learning satisfaction with idiom teaching; the students, regardless of gender and learning achievement, were satisfied with the use of interactive APP for idiom learning. The use of information-technology-integrated cooperative learning for the learning achievement of students in the experimental group did not outperform students in the control group, but the learning satisfaction was better than those in the control group. Kurilovas and Kubilinskiene (2020) mentioned that students in the experimental group with cooperative learning outperformed students with general cooperative learning on learning achievement and learning attitude and presented positive learning satisfaction. Haidar and Fang (2019) explained cooperative learning as teachers effectively applying information technology to smooth cooperative learning; for instance, dynamic information materials and real-time team performance could assist in students’ learning motivation, learning ambition, learning satisfaction, and learning effectiveness and create a quality learning environment with peer teamwork and teacher-student interaction. The following hypothesis is therefore established in this study.

H3 : online cooperative learning reveals notably positive correlations with learning satisfaction. H3-1 : Online cooperative learning shows remarkably positive correlations with learning satisfaction. H3-2 : Online cooperative learning reveals notably negative correlations with learning satisfaction.

Methodology

Operational definition, online cooperative learning.

Online cooperative learning, as the independent variable in this study, is measured with positive interdependence, promotive interaction, social skills, and group processing, according to the blended learning model proposed by Liao et al. (2019) .

• Positive interdependence: mutual dependence, mutual responsibility, mutual help, acceptance of assistance, and cheering up team members.
• Promotive interaction: mutual assistance, sharing information, and providing clear explanation in the team.
• Social skills: leadership and communication.
• Group processing: evaluating the cooperation effectiveness of each other.

Problem-Solving Ability

Problem-solving ability, as the dependent variable in this study, is measured with exploration and comprehension, planning and execution, and monitoring and reflection, according to the problem-solving ability model proposed by Lin et al. (2018) .

Learning Satisfaction

Learning satisfaction, as the dependent variable in this study, is measured with student aspects, teacher aspects, and school aspect, according to the blended learning model proposed by Travis and Bunde (2020) .

• Student aspects: including students’ interests, learning motivation, learning attitude, personality traits, gender, needs, experience, learning ability, learning effectiveness, and peer interpersonal relationship.
• Teacher aspects: covering teachers’ professional ability, traits, teaching methods, curriculum arrangement, teaching content, difficulty in material design, attitude towards students, and teacher-student interaction model.
• School aspects: containing school equipment, learning environment, environmental safety and health, teaching resources, and transportation.

Research Object and Analysis Method

College students in Fujian Province, as the research sample, were distributed 360 copies of a questionnaire for this study. After deducting invalid and incomplete ones, 298 copies were valid, with a retrieval rate 83%. After confirming the applicable online cooperative learning strategy, the actual teaching activity is practiced as planned. Four teachers practicing cooperative learning in the school were invited as the collaborative teachers to deliver the 10-week (total 50 sessions) teaching activity to 500 students in 10 classes of a university in Fujian Province. The questionnaire data collection is preceded after the end of the course.

Two-stage analysis in Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) is applied to analyze goodness-of-fit and test the model in this study. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) is first used, aiming to test the existence of independent variables in the model in order to delete dependent variables with bad effects on causal analysis. Path analysis is then preceded after the modification. Path analysis aims to estimate the relationship of model paths among variables. Without Confirmatory Factor Analysis to test independent variables, the use of path analysis might be affected by independent variables to result in bad goodness-of-fit or insignificant model paths. Goodness-of-fit test in Amos18.0 is utilized in this study. CMIN/DF of the measurement result being smaller than 5 is acceptable and being smaller than 3 is excellent; GFI, AGFI, NFI, IFI, TLI, and CFI are better higher than 0.9; and RMR, RMSEA, and SRMR are better when smaller and ideally smaller than 0.05.

Factor Analysis

The online cooperative learning scale in this study, with factor analysis, extracted four factors of “positive interdependence” (eigenvalue = 2.633, α  = 0.84), “promotive interaction” (eigenvalue = 1.875, α  = 0.86), “social skills” (eigenvalue = 2.236, α  = 0.81), and “group processing” (eigenvalue = 1.633, α  = 0.87). The cumulative covariance explained achieves 75.923%. The problem-solving ability scale, after factor analysis, extracted three factors of “exploration and comprehension” (eigenvalue = 3.251, α  = 0.86), “planning and execution” (eigenvalue = 2.407, α  = 0.88), and “monitoring and reflection” (eigenvalue = 2.716, α  = 0.83). The cumulative covariance explained reaches 77.493%. The learning satisfaction scale, with factor analysis, extracted three factors of “student aspects” (eigenvalue = 1.577, α  = 0.80), “teacher aspects” (eigenvalue = 2.281, α  = 0.85), and “school aspects” (eigenvalue = 2.388, α  = 0.90). The cumulative covariance explained achieves 80.762%.

Empirical Analysis Model of Structural Equation

Regarding the Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) results, the convergent validity of the observation model could observe the reliability of individual observed variable, construct reliability (CR), and average variance extracted (AVE); the reliability of individual observed variable is better higher than 0.5. The factor loadings of observed items in this study are higher than the suggested value. The construct reliability is better higher than 0.6, while other researchers suggest higher than 0.5 being acceptable. The model calibration results reveal the construct reliability higher than 0.5. Average variance extracted is suggested higher than 0.5; the average variance extracted of the dimensions in this study is higher than 0.5, conforming to the suggested value.

In terms of the structural formula calibration results, χ 2 / df , RMSEA, GFI, AGFI, RMR, and NFI are suggested to be ≦5, ≦0.08, ≧0.9, ≧0.9, ≦0.05, and ≧0.9, respectively. This study shows χ 2 / df  = 3.142≦5, RMSEA = 0.032≦0.08, GFI = 0.967≧0.9, AGFI = 0.934≧0.9, RMR = 0.031≦0.05, and NFI = 0.918≧0.9, revealing good overall model fit. Under good overall model fit, the structural formula parameter calibration results are shown in Table 1 and Figure 1 . The research results present online cooperative learning → problem-solving ability 0.327 *** that H1 is supported, problem-solving ability → learning satisfaction 0.423 *** that H2 is supported, and online cooperative learning → learning satisfaction 0.386 *** that H3 is supported.

Structural equation modeling result.

Model path diagram. *** p  < 0.001.

The research results prove that, in the practice of online cooperative learning, information technology makes up for the insufficiency of cooperative learning, enriches courses, promotes students’ learning motivation, and drives learning effectiveness to form a positive cycle. Students’ learning motivation comes from the advancement of performance and the learning confidence comes from the ideal performance. Teachers use online cooperative learning to facilitate group discussion skills and the understanding of students. They also use Google Forms to conduct digitalized tests, and mind maps and tables to improve students’ problem-solving skills ( Simamora, 2017 ). In the teaching-learning process, instructional objectives are inspected to return the teaching profession. Teachers are good at asking questions to enhance students’ cooperation and encourage thinking. Especially in comprehension and analysis, the top-down relationship should be broken and the subjective consideration of teachers’ cognition, ideas, and interpretation as being better than students should be avoided so that it would not come out with teachers’ expected answers ( Phillips et al., 2014 ). Students’ answers could be typed with computers to respect the answers, enhance the confidence without losing students’ creativity, and present brainstorming; teachers ensure the focus and integration at the end. The application of online cooperative learning could reconstruct teachers’ teaching profession, and the experience and constant rolling correction could improve teaching skills to face changeable students and present the value of online cooperative learning. The intervention of information technology could change the resistance to the online cooperative learning process into assistance, helping it to become a powerful backup force of online cooperative learning, induce learning motivation, and promote problem-solving ability and learning satisfaction as the final instructional objectives.

Alves et al. (2019) explained collaborative problem solving as an individual or more than two companions with sufficient capability sharing knowledge and skills through communication and dialogue, collaboratively and effectively participating in activities, and developing teamwork to solve encountered problems. Collaborative problem solving referred to a task being collaboratively completed by several partners. Each partner had to positively participate, mutually coordinate, and help each other in the same situation to solve problems with teamwork so as to effectively enhance learning satisfaction. The intervention of information technology could make the best out of a bad situation in the online cooperative learning process to support online cooperative learning, induce learning motivation, and promote problem solving capability and learning satisfaction as the ultimate instructional objectives. The research result conforms to the points of view proposed by Munawar and Chaudhary (2019) and Haidar and Fang (2019) .

Teachers need full training to guide students with “stretching and jumping” opportunities in the “interactive relationship.” Meanwhile, teachers need full wisdom to help students move from conflict compromise to positive trust ( Ramdani et al., 2019 ). What is more, multiple evaluations outside the classroom, such as completion of team assignments, quiz performances, and sectional examination performance, help teams not to slack. Besides, each member is important that no-one is confident of the winning ( Hafeez, 2021 ). Students would search network data, discuss grounded arguments, focus on discussion through information technology, and save a lot of time for groupwork. Teachers, with statistics, would announce team performance with data at any time to induce competition and crisis awareness of teams. There might be conflict in a team, but a contest with multiple evaluations allows individuals to give up personal prejudice and unite to make effort for the team. It naturally reinforces the group process of cooperative learning ( Akdemir et al., 2020 ).

The research results show that the item of “ Teachers currently use the instructional method of online cooperative learning to make courses interesting and active ” receives the highest score in online cooperative learning strategies, revealing the acquisition of student identity. The item of “ I think the use of platform[s] for Internet communication media could help the communication and teamwork between team members and I in the cooperative learning course ” receives the highest score in problem solving capability, revealing the acquisition of student identity. The item of “ I think the application of online cooperative learning could enhance learning ability and confidence ” receives the highest score in learning satisfaction, revealing the acquisition of student identity.

The research results prove that students’ responses in class are a mirror reminding teachers of the need to adjust the instructional methods. In traditional didactic instruction, students’ academic achievement decides teachers’ success. In the use of online cooperative learning, students’ learning motivation awakes teachers’ passion. Teachers could continuously retain the original instructional methods; nevertheless, modern students are active and there are special students who are extroverts or introverts. These students may challenge teachers’ authority. Teachers can easily get tired if they do not adapt their instructional methods according to the diverse needs of students. The assistance of information technology in the practice allows seeking consensus from online resources in the team discussion. Under the situation with a well-grounded argument, students are convinced by each other to contribute to the successive discussions. The research result conforms to the points of view proposed by Weaver et al. (2019) and Ingrid (2019) . With online cooperative learning, teachers simply combine the original computer software with cooperative learning courses through the Internet, rather than re-learning brand new and strange computer software. Teachers who enjoy learning and self-growth could challenge themselves and activate teaching with advanced functions. However, it should be kept in mind that information technologies are only tools; using media can attract students’ attention in a short period, but having students internalize knowledge is the goal. Karakus Taysi (2019) mentioned the aims of education as helping individuals live their life. The development of individual critical thinking and problem-solving skills are the main aims of contemporary education. Teachers did not simply propagate the doctrine, impart professional knowledge, and resolve doubts in the teaching process, but had to help students link old experience with new knowledge, make tight cognitive structures for meaningful learning, and further solve problems to effectively promote learning satisfaction.

Online cooperation learning method is important for cultivating students’ independent thinking, interpersonal communication, competition awareness, and teamwork ( Cortez et al., 2021 ). Teachers and students are good at utilizing information technology to have students focus on discussion content and direction, instantaneously acquire the answers and feedback and correction, and improve team performance with data ( Mutua and Ong'ong'a, 2020 ). When making effort in the learning process, the learning result would not be lower than the expected performance and students would reflect this with their learning satisfaction.

Data Availability Statement

Ethics statement.

This study was reviewed and approved by the ethics committee of the Huaqiao University. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants for their participation in this study.

Author Contributions

Y-PW performed the initial analyses and wrote the manuscript. T-JW assisted in the data collection and data analysis. All authors revised and approved the submitted version of the manuscript.

This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (71702059).

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as potential conflicts of interest.

Publisher’s Note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

• Akdemir Ö., Biçer D., Parmaksız R. Ş. (2020). Information and communications technology metaphors . Mediterr J. Soc. Behav Res 4 , 11–18. doi: 10.30935/mjosbr/9596, PMID: [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Alves N. D. C., Von Wangenheim C. G., Hauck J. C. (2019). Approaches to Assess Computational Thinking Competences Based on Code Analysis in K-12 Education: A Systematic Mapping Study . Inform Educ. 18 , 17–39. doi: 10.15388/infedu.2019.02, PMID: [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chiao B., MacVaugh J. (2021). Open innovation and organizational features: An experimental investigation . Eur. Manag. J. 39 , 376–389. doi: 10.1016/j.emj.2020.12.004 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cortez C. P., Patricio C. S., Uriarte W. N., Jr. (2021). Teachers at lock-Down: generalized anxiety disorder and attitude towards E-learning amidst COVID-19 era . Eur J interact multi Educ 2 :e02113. doi: 10.30935/ejimed/11288 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Del Gaudio B. L., Porzio C., Sampagnaro G., Verdoliva V. (2021). How do mobile, internet and ICT diffusion affect the banking industry? An empirical analysis. Eur. Manag. J. 39 , 327–332. doi: 10.1016/j.emj.2020.07.003 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hafeez M. (2021). Impact of Teacher’s training on interest and academic achievements of students by multiple teaching methods . Pedagogical Res 6 :em0102. doi: 10.29333/pr/11088 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Haidar S., Fang F. (2019). English language in education and globalization: A comparative analysis of the role of English in Pakistan and China . Asia Pacific J. Educ. 39 , 165–176. doi: 10.1080/02188791.2019.1569892 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ingrid I. (2019). The effect of peer collaboration-based learning on enhancing English oral communication proficiency in MICE . J. Hosp. Leis. Sport Tour. Educ. 24 , 38–49. doi: 10.1016/j.jhlste.2018.10.006 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Karakus Taysi E. (2019). The effect of listening attitude and listening anxiety on listening comprehension: A regression model . Univ. J. Educ. Res. 7 , 356–364. doi: 10.13189/ujer.2019.070207 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kurilovas E., Kubilinskiene S. (2020). Lithuanian case study on evaluating suitability, acceptance and use of IT tools by students–An example of applying technology enhanced learning research methods in higher education . Comput. Hum. Behav. 107 :106274. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2020.106274 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Li K., Keller J. M. (2018). Use of the ARCS model in education: A literature review . Comput. Educ. 122 , 54–62. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2018.03.019, PMID: [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Li M., Yin D., Qiu H., Bai B. (2021). A systematic review of AI technology-based service encounters: implications for hospitality and tourism operations . Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 95 :102930. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2021.102930 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Liao H. C., Li Y. C., Wang Y. H. (2019). Optimal cooperative learning grouping to improve medical university students’ English competencies . SAGE Open 9 :2158244019861454. doi: 10.1177/2158244019861454 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lin Y. H., Hsu Y. L., Lin Y. L., Hsiao W. L. (2018). An action research of nature science education in junior high schools focusing on influence of play-oriented cooperative learning . Int J Organ Innov 10 , 226–244. [ Google Scholar ]
• Metin-Orta I., Demirtepe-Saygılı D. (2021). Cyberloafing behaviors among university students: their relationships with positive and negative affect . Curr. Psychol. 1–14. doi: 10.1007/s12144-021-02374-3, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Min J., Kim H., Yoo J. (2021). Effects of self-esteem, problem-solving ability, and professional nursing values on the career identity of nursing college students in South Korea: A cross-sectional study . Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 18 :8531. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18168531, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Munawar S., Chaudhary A. H. (2019). Effect of cooperative learning on the writing skill at elementary level in the subject of English . Bull. Educ. Res. 41 , 35–44. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mutua S. N., Ong’ong’a D. O. (2020). Online news media framing of COVID-19 pandemic: probing the initial phases of the disease outbreak in international media . Eur J Interact Multi Educ 1 :e02006. doi: 10.30935/ejimed/8402 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Oates J., Ritók N. I. (2018). The Role of Art Education in Children’s Development . NY, USA: Young Children’s Play and Creativity. [ Google Scholar ]
• Phillips B. N., Fleming A. R., Kaseroff A., Huck G. E. (2014). Work-related social skills: definitions and interventions in public vocational rehabilitation . Rehabil. Psychol. 59 , 386–398. doi: 10.1037/rep0000011, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ramdani R., Syamsuddin A., Sirajuddin S. (2019). Development of mathematical module-problem solving approach to train Student’s reflective thinking . Pedagogical Res 4 :em0040. doi: 10.29333/pr/5861 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Simamora E. W. (2017). The effect of student team achievement division cooperative learning on The concept understanding ability of mathematic advances in social science . Educ Humanit Res 104 , 407–411. doi: 10.2991/aisteel-17.2017.87 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Travis J., Bunde J. (2020). Self-regulation in college: The influence of self-efficacy, need satisfaction, and stress on GPA, persistence, and satisfaction . Curr. Psychol. 1–11. doi: 10.1007/s12144-020-01091-7 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Vaz A. L. A., Ferreira F. A., Pereira L. F., Correia R. J., Banaitis A. (2021). Strategic visualization: the (real) usefulness of cognitive mapping in smart city conceptualization . Manag. Decis. 60 , 916–939. doi: 10.1108/MD-11-2020-1512 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Weaver R. H., Naar J. J., Jarrott S. E. (2019). Using contact theory to assess staff perspectives on training initiatives of an intergenerational programming intervention . The Gerontologist 59 , 770–779. doi: 10.1093/geront/gnx194, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wu T. J., Xu T., Li L. Q., Yuan K. S. (2020). “Touching with heart, reasoning by truth!” The impact of brand cues on mini-film advertising effect . Int. J. Advert. 39 , 1322–1350. doi: 10.1080/02650487.2020.1755184 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wu T. J., Yuan K. S., Yen D. C. (2021). Leader-member exchange, turnover intention and presenteeism–the moderated mediating effect of perceived organizational support . Curr. Psychol. 1–12. doi: 10.1007/s12144-021-01825-1, PMID: [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wu T. J., Yuan K. S., Yen D. C., Xu T. (2019). Building up resources in the relationship between work–family conflict and burnout among firefighters: moderators of guanxi and emotion regulation strategies . Eur. J. Work. Organ. Psychol. 28 , 430–441. doi: 10.1080/1359432X.2019.1596081 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wu T. J., Yuan K. S., Yen D. C., Yeh C. F. (2022). The effects of JDC model on burnout and work engagement: A multiple interaction analysis . Eur. Manag. J. doi: 10.1016/j.emj.2022.02.001 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Published: 25 January 2021

Online education in the post-COVID era

• Barbara B. Lockee 1  

Nature Electronics volume  4 ,  pages 5–6 ( 2021 ) Cite this article

138k Accesses

204 Citations

337 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Science, technology and society

The coronavirus pandemic has forced students and educators across all levels of education to rapidly adapt to online learning. The impact of this — and the developments required to make it work — could permanently change how education is delivered.

The COVID-19 pandemic has forced the world to engage in the ubiquitous use of virtual learning. And while online and distance learning has been used before to maintain continuity in education, such as in the aftermath of earthquakes 1 , the scale of the current crisis is unprecedented. Speculation has now also begun about what the lasting effects of this will be and what education may look like in the post-COVID era. For some, an immediate retreat to the traditions of the physical classroom is required. But for others, the forced shift to online education is a moment of change and a time to reimagine how education could be delivered 2 .

Looking back

Online education has traditionally been viewed as an alternative pathway, one that is particularly well suited to adult learners seeking higher education opportunities. However, the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic has required educators and students across all levels of education to adapt quickly to virtual courses. (The term ‘emergency remote teaching’ was coined in the early stages of the pandemic to describe the temporary nature of this transition 3 .) In some cases, instruction shifted online, then returned to the physical classroom, and then shifted back online due to further surges in the rate of infection. In other cases, instruction was offered using a combination of remote delivery and face-to-face: that is, students can attend online or in person (referred to as the HyFlex model 4 ). In either case, instructors just had to figure out how to make it work, considering the affordances and constraints of the specific learning environment to create learning experiences that were feasible and effective.

The use of varied delivery modes does, in fact, have a long history in education. Mechanical (and then later electronic) teaching machines have provided individualized learning programmes since the 1950s and the work of B. F. Skinner 5 , who proposed using technology to walk individual learners through carefully designed sequences of instruction with immediate feedback indicating the accuracy of their response. Skinner’s notions formed the first formalized representations of programmed learning, or ‘designed’ learning experiences. Then, in the 1960s, Fred Keller developed a personalized system of instruction 6 , in which students first read assigned course materials on their own, followed by one-on-one assessment sessions with a tutor, gaining permission to move ahead only after demonstrating mastery of the instructional material. Occasional class meetings were held to discuss concepts, answer questions and provide opportunities for social interaction. A personalized system of instruction was designed on the premise that initial engagement with content could be done independently, then discussed and applied in the social context of a classroom.

These predecessors to contemporary online education leveraged key principles of instructional design — the systematic process of applying psychological principles of human learning to the creation of effective instructional solutions — to consider which methods (and their corresponding learning environments) would effectively engage students to attain the targeted learning outcomes. In other words, they considered what choices about the planning and implementation of the learning experience can lead to student success. Such early educational innovations laid the groundwork for contemporary virtual learning, which itself incorporates a variety of instructional approaches and combinations of delivery modes.

Online learning and the pandemic

Fast forward to 2020, and various further educational innovations have occurred to make the universal adoption of remote learning a possibility. One key challenge is access. Here, extensive problems remain, including the lack of Internet connectivity in some locations, especially rural ones, and the competing needs among family members for the use of home technology. However, creative solutions have emerged to provide students and families with the facilities and resources needed to engage in and successfully complete coursework 7 . For example, school buses have been used to provide mobile hotspots, and class packets have been sent by mail and instructional presentations aired on local public broadcasting stations. The year 2020 has also seen increased availability and adoption of electronic resources and activities that can now be integrated into online learning experiences. Synchronous online conferencing systems, such as Zoom and Google Meet, have allowed experts from anywhere in the world to join online classrooms 8 and have allowed presentations to be recorded for individual learners to watch at a time most convenient for them. Furthermore, the importance of hands-on, experiential learning has led to innovations such as virtual field trips and virtual labs 9 . A capacity to serve learners of all ages has thus now been effectively established, and the next generation of online education can move from an enterprise that largely serves adult learners and higher education to one that increasingly serves younger learners, in primary and secondary education and from ages 5 to 18.

The COVID-19 pandemic is also likely to have a lasting effect on lesson design. The constraints of the pandemic provided an opportunity for educators to consider new strategies to teach targeted concepts. Though rethinking of instructional approaches was forced and hurried, the experience has served as a rare chance to reconsider strategies that best facilitate learning within the affordances and constraints of the online context. In particular, greater variance in teaching and learning activities will continue to question the importance of ‘seat time’ as the standard on which educational credits are based 10 — lengthy Zoom sessions are seldom instructionally necessary and are not aligned with the psychological principles of how humans learn. Interaction is important for learning but forced interactions among students for the sake of interaction is neither motivating nor beneficial.

While the blurring of the lines between traditional and distance education has been noted for several decades 11 , the pandemic has quickly advanced the erasure of these boundaries. Less single mode, more multi-mode (and thus more educator choices) is becoming the norm due to enhanced infrastructure and developed skill sets that allow people to move across different delivery systems 12 . The well-established best practices of hybrid or blended teaching and learning 13 have served as a guide for new combinations of instructional delivery that have developed in response to the shift to virtual learning. The use of multiple delivery modes is likely to remain, and will be a feature employed with learners of all ages 14 , 15 . Future iterations of online education will no longer be bound to the traditions of single teaching modes, as educators can support pedagogical approaches from a menu of instructional delivery options, a mix that has been supported by previous generations of online educators 16 .

Also significant are the changes to how learning outcomes are determined in online settings. Many educators have altered the ways in which student achievement is measured, eliminating assignments and changing assessment strategies altogether 17 . Such alterations include determining learning through strategies that leverage the online delivery mode, such as interactive discussions, student-led teaching and the use of games to increase motivation and attention. Specific changes that are likely to continue include flexible or extended deadlines for assignment completion 18 , more student choice regarding measures of learning, and more authentic experiences that involve the meaningful application of newly learned skills and knowledge 19 , for example, team-based projects that involve multiple creative and social media tools in support of collaborative problem solving.

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, technological and administrative systems for implementing online learning, and the infrastructure that supports its access and delivery, had to adapt quickly. While access remains a significant issue for many, extensive resources have been allocated and processes developed to connect learners with course activities and materials, to facilitate communication between instructors and students, and to manage the administration of online learning. Paths for greater access and opportunities to online education have now been forged, and there is a clear route for the next generation of adopters of online education.

Before the pandemic, the primary purpose of distance and online education was providing access to instruction for those otherwise unable to participate in a traditional, place-based academic programme. As its purpose has shifted to supporting continuity of instruction, its audience, as well as the wider learning ecosystem, has changed. It will be interesting to see which aspects of emergency remote teaching remain in the next generation of education, when the threat of COVID-19 is no longer a factor. But online education will undoubtedly find new audiences. And the flexibility and learning possibilities that have emerged from necessity are likely to shift the expectations of students and educators, diminishing further the line between classroom-based instruction and virtual learning.

Mackey, J., Gilmore, F., Dabner, N., Breeze, D. & Buckley, P. J. Online Learn. Teach. 8 , 35–48 (2012).

Google Scholar  

Sands, T. & Shushok, F. The COVID-19 higher education shove. Educause Review https://go.nature.com/3o2vHbX (16 October 2020).

Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T. & Bond, M. A. The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. Educause Review https://go.nature.com/38084Lh (27 March 2020).

Beatty, B. J. (ed.) Hybrid-Flexible Course Design Ch. 1.4 https://go.nature.com/3o6Sjb2 (EdTech Books, 2019).

Skinner, B. F. Science 128 , 969–977 (1958).

Article   Google Scholar  

Keller, F. S. J. Appl. Behav. Anal. 1 , 79–89 (1968).

Darling-Hammond, L. et al. Restarting and Reinventing School: Learning in the Time of COVID and Beyond (Learning Policy Institute, 2020).

Fulton, C. Information Learn. Sci . 121 , 579–585 (2020).

Pennisi, E. Science 369 , 239–240 (2020).

Silva, E. & White, T. Change The Magazine Higher Learn. 47 , 68–72 (2015).

McIsaac, M. S. & Gunawardena, C. N. in Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology (ed. Jonassen, D. H.) Ch. 13 (Simon & Schuster Macmillan, 1996).

Irvine, V. The landscape of merging modalities. Educause Review https://go.nature.com/2MjiBc9 (26 October 2020).

Stein, J. & Graham, C. Essentials for Blended Learning Ch. 1 (Routledge, 2020).

Maloy, R. W., Trust, T. & Edwards, S. A. Variety is the spice of remote learning. Medium https://go.nature.com/34Y1NxI (24 August 2020).

Lockee, B. J. Appl. Instructional Des . https://go.nature.com/3b0ddoC (2020).

Dunlap, J. & Lowenthal, P. Open Praxis 10 , 79–89 (2018).

Johnson, N., Veletsianos, G. & Seaman, J. Online Learn. 24 , 6–21 (2020).

Vaughan, N. D., Cleveland-Innes, M. & Garrison, D. R. Assessment in Teaching in Blended Learning Environments: Creating and Sustaining Communities of Inquiry (Athabasca Univ. Press, 2013).

Conrad, D. & Openo, J. Assessment Strategies for Online Learning: Engagement and Authenticity (Athabasca Univ. Press, 2018).

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Education, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, USA

Barbara B. Lockee

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Barbara B. Lockee .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The author declares no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Lockee, B.B. Online education in the post-COVID era. Nat Electron 4 , 5–6 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41928-020-00534-0

Download citation

Published : 25 January 2021

Issue Date : January 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41928-020-00534-0

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

A comparative study on the effectiveness of online and in-class team-based learning on student performance and perceptions in virtual simulation experiments.

BMC Medical Education (2024)

Leveraging privacy profiles to empower users in the digital society

• Davide Di Ruscio
• Paola Inverardi
• Phuong T. Nguyen

Automated Software Engineering (2024)

Growth mindset and social comparison effects in a peer virtual learning environment

• Pamela Sheffler
• Cecilia S. Cheung

Social Psychology of Education (2024)

Nursing students’ learning flow, self-efficacy and satisfaction in virtual clinical simulation and clinical case seminar

• Sunghee H. Tak

BMC Nursing (2023)

Online learning for WHO priority diseases with pandemic potential: evidence from existing courses and preparing for Disease X

• Heini Utunen
• Corentin Piroux

Archives of Public Health (2023)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

ORPARC Training - An Introduction to Collaborative Problem Solving®

Thursday, january 21, 2021 – 6:00pm, 6:00pm - 7:00pm.

Please join Swindells Resource Center and certified trainers Marcus Saraceno and Paul Kammerzelt from Watershed Problem Solving LLC, for an introduction to Collaborative Problem Solving® (CPS).

• The Collaborative Problem Solving® approach
• Skills used for solving problems
• Interventions used in the Collaborative Problem Solving® model
• What to do next?

Download Flyer here

Swindells Online Webinar

Exploring Options Approach to Problem Solving – 2031

This instructor-led course covers the problem solving strategy of exploring and considering others' opinions and perspectives during decision making.

Live online events

Description

When you are faced with problems, there are many strategies to solve them. One effective strategy is to explore options and consider more than one person’s before coming up with a solution. This course will highlight the importance of taking other people’s perspectives into account, exploring your options, and deciding on a path forward.

By the end of this course, you will be able to:

• Describe how to explore options when solving problems.
• List some of the key issues to consider in problem solving.
• Explain why it is important to consider more than one person’s perspective in problem solving.
• Explain why it is important to consider more than one option to solving a problem.
• Demonstrate how to explore options to assist a consumer to solve a problem.

This is course # 2031 in IHSS Career Pathways. It is part of the General Health & Safety Pathway, which is a general pathway.

Please note: Each class can only be taken once. Registrations for additional sessions of the same course are not eligible for payment of training time or incentives and may be deleted. If you wish to change your registration to a different time or date, please cancel your reservation in the User Portal after registering for the new session. If you need help, please contact [email protected].

Similar courses

About & legal, homebridge office.

1035 Market St. Suite 100, San Francisco, CA 94103