Psychological safety of participants in the educational process during the COVID-19 pandemic: a comparative analysis of online learning CTE Workshop Proceedings, 2025, Vol. 12, pp. 471–497 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 Psychological safety of participants in the educational process during the COVID-19 pandemic: a comparative analysis of online learning Olena I. Bondarchuk1, Valentyna V. Balakhtar2, Yuriy O. Ushenko3, Olena O. Gorova1, Iryna M. Osovska3, Nataliia I. Pinchuk1, Nataliia O. Yakubovska3, Kateryna S. Pavlenok4 and Maksym V. Moskalov1 1University of Educational Management, 52A Sichovykh Striltsiv Str., Kyiv, 04053, Ukraine 2National Aviation University, 1 Liubomyr Huzar Ave., Kyiv, 03058, Ukraine 3Yuriy Fedkovych Chernivtsi National University, 2 Kotsiubynskyi Str., Chernivtsi, 58012, Ukraine 4Lviv Polytechnic National University, 12 Stepan Bandera Str., Lviv, 79013, Ukraine Abstract. This paper examines the psychological safety of participants in the educational process during the COVID-19 pandemic, with a focus on the mass transition to distance learning. The study presents a comparative analysis of students’ assessments of online learning during the pandemic, highlighting the peculiarities of the psychological safety of the educational environment and its impact on students. The results reveal a statistically significant difference in the peculiarities of the psychological safety of participants in the educational process as to gender, age, and status. The survey of participants in the educational process presents the results as to their attitude to the peculiarities of learning under the conditions of the COVID-19. They testify to the deterioration of psychological safety in the educational environment of higher education institutions, and, accordingly, the subjective well-being of participants in the educational process in a pandemic. There was a decrease in the number of respondents with a positive attitude to distance learning and a willingness to work exclusively online. Keywords: psychological safety, educational process, COVID-19 pandemic, online learning, subjective well-being 1. Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic has posed unprecedented challenges to various aspects of human life, such as public health, social interaction, professional work, scien- tific research, education, and religion. To cope with these challenges, many people � 0000-0003-3920-242X (O. I. Bondarchuk); 0000-0001-6343-2888 (V. V. Balakhtar); 0000-0003-1767-1882 (Y. O. Ushenko); 0000-0001-9022-3432 (O. O. Gorova); 0000-0002-8109-658X (I. M. Osovska); 0000-0003-1904-804X (N. I. Pinchuk); 0000-0003-2391-6188 (N. O. Yakubovska); 0000-0002-9154-9095 (K. S. Pavlenok); 0000-0002-3213-9635 (M. V. Moskalov) # bei.07@ukr.net (O. I. Bondarchuk); v.balakhtar@chnu.edu.ua (V. V. Balakhtar); y.ushenko@chnu.edu.ua (Y. O. Ushenko); gorovaya.111@gmail.com (O. O. Gorova); i.osovska@chnu.edu.ua (I. M. Osovska); tacya3@gmail.com (N. I. Pinchuk); n.yakubovska@chnu.edu.ua (N. O. Yakubovska); bkskatrin@gmail.com (K. S. Pavlenok); maksimmv@ukr.net (M. V. Moskalov) ~ http: //umo.edu.ua/institutes/cippo/struktura/kafedra-psikhologhiji/sklad/bondarchuk--olena-ivanivna (O. I. Bondarchuk); https://pppo.nau.edu.ua/balakhtar-valentyna-vizitorivna-2/ (V. V. Balakhtar); https://kkn.chnu.edu.ua/about-kafedra/spivrobitnyky/ushenko/ (Y. O. Ushenko); http: //umo.edu.ua/institutes/cippo/struktura/kafedra-psikhologhiji/sklad/pinchuk--natalija-ivanivna (N. I. Pinchuk); http://umo.edu.ua/institutes/cippo/struktura/kafedra-psikhologhiji/sklad/ moskaljov-maksim-volodimirovich (M. V. Moskalov) CTE Workshop Proceedings © Copyright for this article by its authors, published by the Academy of Cognitive and Natural Sciences. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons License Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 471 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3920-242X https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6343-2888 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1767-1882 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9022-3432 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8109-658X https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1904-804X https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2391-6188 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9154-9095 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3213-9635 mailto:bei.07@ukr.net mailto:v.balakhtar@chnu.edu.ua mailto:y.ushenko@chnu.edu.ua mailto:gorovaya.111@gmail.com mailto:i.osovska@chnu.edu.ua mailto:tacya3@gmail.com mailto:n.yakubovska@chnu.edu.ua mailto:bkskatrin@gmail.com mailto:maksimmv@ukr.net http://umo.edu.ua/institutes/cippo/struktura/kafedra-psikhologhiji/sklad/bondarchuk--olena-ivanivna http://umo.edu.ua/institutes/cippo/struktura/kafedra-psikhologhiji/sklad/bondarchuk--olena-ivanivna https://pppo.nau.edu.ua/balakhtar-valentyna-vizitorivna-2/ https://kkn.chnu.edu.ua/about-kafedra/spivrobitnyky/ushenko/ http://umo.edu.ua/institutes/cippo/struktura/kafedra-psikhologhiji/sklad/pinchuk--natalija-ivanivna http://umo.edu.ua/institutes/cippo/struktura/kafedra-psikhologhiji/sklad/pinchuk--natalija-ivanivna http://umo.edu.ua/institutes/cippo/struktura/kafedra-psikhologhiji/sklad/moskaljov-maksim-volodimirovich http://umo.edu.ua/institutes/cippo/struktura/kafedra-psikhologhiji/sklad/moskaljov-maksim-volodimirovich https://acnsci.org/cte https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en https://acnsci.org CTE Workshop Proceedings, 2025, Vol. 12, pp. 471–497 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 have turned to online services as a way of maintaining their normal activities while minimizing the risk of infection [40, 46, 56, 59]. One of the most affected domains by the pandemic is education, as many educa- tional institutions around the world have switched to distance learning to ensure the continuity and quality of the educational process [15, 30, 37]. According to UNESCO, almost 70% of the world’s students are not attending school due to the closure of learning institutions as a response to the COVID-19 pandemic [33]. The transition from traditional (full-time) to distance learning has exposed many gaps, problems, anxiety, and unpreparedness among the users of social networks, who face unexpected challenges in adapting to the new mode of learning. Forced distance learning requires not only the organization of the educational process in quarantine and the use of traditional teaching methods, but also the provision of specific resources for e-learning, the mastery of information tools, and the ability to use them according to the learning objectives. Moreover, each person needs to feel psychologically safe in the modern Internet environment and in the information space in general. Therefore, the problem of the psychological safety of a person who studies online in a pandemic becomes especially relevant. Psychological safety is a type of safety awareness based on the psychological climate of the educational process in educational institutions [41, pp. 433-440]. This is especially important in times of social changes, the rapid development of informa- tion technology, and the possibility of using various means of influencing human consciousness. In this context, a psychologically safe educational environment is a condition for the personal growth of the participants of the educational process through their interaction, free from the manifestations of psychological violence; refer- ence significance and involvement of each subject in designing and maintaining the psychological comfort of the educational environment; a humanistic orientation, etc [11]. 2. Literature review Psychological safety is a basic need for safety, “a kind of sense of confidence, safety and freedom that removes fear and anxiety, in particular, it contains a feeling that a person meets current and future needs” [38, pp. 21-41]. Psychological safety involves the reduction of interpersonal risk, which necessarily accompanies uncertainty and change [50, 53], readiness to “get a job or express oneself physically, cognitively and emotionally during role performances”, the ability to “refuse and defend one’s personal” [29, pp. 692-724]. Nowadays complex conditions and the specific features of the digital environment in the COVID-19 pandemic, which is a favourable basis for psychological violence, cyberbullying, manipulative influences, caused the problem of psychological safety of participants in the educational process in the mass transition to distance learning, which attracts particular attention. In particular, a new form of bullying – cyberbul- lying is a form of behaviour that consists in sending messages of an aggressive and offensive nature using new information and communication technologies (Internet, and mobile phone). There are many factors and theories of bullying, the most famous of which is the sketch theory of Olweus [43, pp. 5-17], where the existence of typical characteristics of “victim” and “aggressor”. Other forms of cyberbullying are the “hacking” actions aimed at harming the “vic- tims”’ personal computers (hacking and changing passwords, damaging personal websites, etc.). All these damages determine the presence of specific features of such “high-tech” bullying in comparison to a traditional one. Firstly, constant hostile actions are inessential, as, for example, one-time damage to 472 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 CTE Workshop Proceedings, 2025, Vol. 12, pp. 471–497 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 the victim’s website with the addition of offensive information may have a longitudinal effect (many network users will read the message). Secondly, the factor of physical strength, important in cases of ordinary (contact) bullying, is insignificant. The intellectual abilities and technical skills of the aggressor come to the fore in this case. Thirdly, there is no direct communication between the “aggressor” and the “victim”. So the “aggressor”, for example, does not observe the reaction of his/her “victim” and the outcomes of the actions. Bullying via the Internet allows the “aggressor” to remain anonymously and turn the situation of persestageion into a kind of “masquerade” [26, pp. 206-221]. Therefore, the psychological safety of all the participants in the educational process studying online in a pandemic is a prerequisite for their psychological well-being and psychological health. We single out such scientific investigations of recent years, which together with the above serve theoretical and methodological basis for research. We have developed the conceptual provisions on the content of the psychological safety of the individual in general [20, 21, 47] and its role in the process of knowledge exchange in virtual communities, in particular [33]. We consider safety as a key psychological characteristic of the educational environment [3], while the psycho- logically safe educational environment as a condition for the personal growth of the participants of the educational process through their interaction, independence from the manifestations of psychological violence; reference significance and involvement of each subject in designing and maintaining the psychological comfort of the educational environment; a humanistic orientation, etc. The research examines the specifics of psychological safety as one of the most important factors of work in the virtual environment [12, 20, 24, 48]. The following study has analysed: the features of distance learning under the conditions of self-isolation as to the COVID-19 pandemic [5]; the peculiarities of the use of diverse digital educational resources and online learning tools in the educational process [32, 34, 61]; the specifics of the organization of effective work of remote virtual teams online [45], management aspect in distance learning [31, pp. 8-27]; the possibility of obtaining the psychological safety in such teams [17, 18] and approaches of ensuring the psychological safety in a crisis [16]. Besides, most students and teachers of higher education institutions had little experience with online tools, information technology before the COVID-19 pandemic. Today’s challenges have caused a shock in society – a threat to human health from COVID-19, economic downturn, the transition to distance learning, job losses, social support, business closures and more [28]. Distance learning is not the same as online learning. Real online learning takes place on digital platforms designed for this purpose, often with personalized content for each student and options for using their chosen digital tools. Online learning promotes different types of learning preferences, provides flexibility and uses quality indicators online. But under COVID-19, distance learning for the student community did not include any of these functions but instead provided a set time to listen to teachers’ lectures via Zoom or Google Meet [62, p. 54]. Moreover, pre-coronavirus online training programs may not be as effective without the support of teachers and a personal learning structure. The teaching staff needs pedagogical support for distance learning and proper edu- cation on the systems used and preparation of the content of academic disciplines [31], mastering new technologies and their use in parallel with their previous experience and beliefs [13, 26]. After all, digital competence is now an essential competence that modern man needs 473 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 CTE Workshop Proceedings, 2025, Vol. 12, pp. 471–497 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 for personal realization and development, employment, social integration and active citizenship [10, 19]. In Ukraine, scholars are currently conducting the research, which relates mainly to psychological care and psychotherapeutic practice in a pandemic in various spheres of public life [35]. For instance, the well-known scientific work “The world of life and psychological safety of human under conditions of social change”, carried out by a team of scientists led by M. Slyusarevsky at the Institute of Social and Political Psychology during 2000-2017, which contains extremely valuable scientific results. However, authors of the work naturally could not predict the course of events related to the COVID-19 pandemic and, accordingly, conduct basic research in this aspect, the results, in particular, determine the ways of the rise of the individual’s psychological safety under the conditions of social changes. Despite numerous studies, the problem of psychological safety of the educational environment in general and students studying online in a pandemic, in particular, attracts attention. As a result, the desire for safety is a basic human need, an important factor in the self-realization of the individual in professional and personal life and a condition for a full life of the individual [49]. Consequently, the most important goal of the educational institutions is to ensure the psychological safety of the educational environment for students studying online in a pandemic, integrating the effective use of ICT in the educational process, updating the psychological and pedagogical science. At the same time, it is essential to fully promote the change of education for a sustainable future by strengthening critical thinking, communication, cooperation and creativity in youth [51, 52]. The goal of the article is to present the features of the psychological safety of the educational environment and their impact on students studying online in a pandemic. Objectives of the study – to find out: 1) peculiarities of psychological safety of the educational environment for participants of the educational process online; 2) participants’ attitudes in the educational process (students and teachers) to the peculiarities of learning under the conditions of the COVID-19 pandemic; 3) to carry out a comparative analysis of students’ assessments studying online in a pandemic regarding the change of the psychological safety of the educational environment of higher education institutions. 3. Methods For studying the features of the psychological safety of the educational environment and their impact on students studying online in a pandemic, was the method of I. Baeva “Psychological safety of the educational environment” [3] modified by O. Bondarchuk [8, 11], which allowed measuring the level of psychological safety of the individual in the educational environment. The author’s questionnaire carried out the study of the peculiarities of the psycho- logical safety of the educational environment for the participants of the educational process and their attitude to the features of learning under the COVID-19 pandemic condition. Afterwards, the respondents answered the questions on various aspects of learning, such as: 1. Does the educational institution contribute to your psychological safety under the conditions of the COVID-19? 2. Is distance learning comfortable for you? 3. What form of training is optimal for you? 474 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 CTE Workshop Proceedings, 2025, Vol. 12, pp. 471–497 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 4. What information tools do you use in the educational process in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic? etc. The empirical study implemented online through Google Forms. This allowed prompting feedback from participants in the educational process. From our previous work experience, Google Forms “not only determines the nature of the relationship between the participants of the educational process and the degree of satisfaction with them, and the socio-psychological climate as an indicator of organizational culture but also makes the appropriate management decisions and forecast situations in the educational environment; promptly intervenes and makes appropriate adjustments to the educational process; specifically, plans work on the relevant problem in the institution of higher education; creates conditions for comparing one’s assessment of the pedagogical staff’s activity with an independent assessment” [9] and surveys the level of this influence. The usage of Google Forms and other information and communication resources in education allows you to: easily and quickly adapt to new requirements of distance education; monitor the quality of education; create an optimal environment for edu- cational services; and understand human behaviour in the social environment, life cycles and interactions between biological, psychological, social-structural, economic, political and cultural factors of the educational process [6, pp. 93-104]. There is the widespread usage of Google Forms for conducting various surveys, including for testing the level of knowledge acquisition; as a test platform, and test results are stored in the Google Cloud [44]. Surveying or testing via Google Forms allows not only to significantly increase the level of research or testing, to reach a large number of students but also to reduce the labour costs of data processing for the teacher. After all, it is achievable to create an unlimited number of surveys, questionnaires, tests and invite an endless number of respondents. Tasks may vary in different spheres of the discipline and include questions on a specific topic or general topic or even an entire course. Besides, Google Forms allows you to create a form with different elements or types of questions where each can be made mandatory or optional. While creating a form, you may change the order of questions and choose different designs for their design. The link to the form is generated automatically after its creation. To better monitor the students’ academic achievements and, in turn, to join the well-designed learning goals, the distance learning assessment affords noteworthy chances during the educational process. To clarify the dynamics of indicators of psychological safety of the educational environment of higher education institutions during the year in a re-survey Google Forms was supplemented with questions: 1. If you compare your sense of psychological safety and comfort in an educational institution today and a year ago? 2. If you compare your attitude to distance education now and a year ago? 3. If you compare your psychological well-being (including mental health) now and a year ago? Respondents had to choose from the following answer options: a) significantly worsened b) has worsened c) practically has not changed d) has improved e) significantly improved 475 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 CTE Workshop Proceedings, 2025, Vol. 12, pp. 471–497 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 Besides, we were interested in aspects related to the experience of psychological security and well-being in online learning, in particular: 1. What measures, actions did you take for your own development during the quarantine period? 2. Are you ready to fully switch to online learning? The research used the content analysis with the focus on determining the relation- ship between psychological safety and well-being of participants in the educational process, and their knowledge and practical activities in the context of distance learning. Yuriy Fedkovych Chernivtsi National University and SHEI “The University of Educa- tional Management” respondents were invited to participate in the study, acquainted with the purpose, scope and process of the study; received permission from the teach- ing staff, who agreed to participate. Information sheets about the research and a questionnaire in the Google Forms were sent to the participants of the educational process via e-mails. The survey was conducted at the beginning of the previous year (March, I stage), and at the end of 2020 (December, II stage) a re-form was sent to the addresses specified in the generalized Excel sheet. Responses came from almost all respondents in the first sample, who responded positively to the situation of re-survey. This, in particular, is evidenced by the instructions in a large number of sent response forms such as: “I was glad to help”, “Thank you very much for your interest in our psychological state”, “Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the survey” etc. Participants in the educational process received information from research staff on unclear issues or situations by e-mail. This way ensured that the participants in the educational process gave clear answers to the questions asked. Statistical data processing and graphical presentation of results was carried out using the SPSS 17.0. 4. Analysis of the research results 4.1. Social and demographic characteristics of the research sample The main group of respondents consisted of 174 people – representatives of so- cionomic professions of Yuriy Fedkovych Chernivtsi National University and SHEI “The University of Educational Management”, whose professional activities include “spiritual and moral maturity”, “increased moral responsibility” and “values to peo- ple’s lives”, “willingness to face changing challenges” and “uncertainty” [55]. The respondents were divided into groups according to: • gender (37.9% male & 62.1% female); • age (up to 20 years – 15.5%, 20-30 years – 41.4%, 30-40 years – 15.5%, 40-50 years – 15.5%, over 50 years – 12.1%); • place of residence (village – 41.4%, town – 58.6%); • status (student – 75.9%, teacher – 24.1%) (table 1). The separation of groups depending on the sex of the respondents was due to the gender features of the perception of psychological safety of the environment in different spheres of public life revealed in the research [14]. In particular, gender dissimilarity may have a more negative impact on the psychological safety of men with an increased number of women in working groups than on the psychological safety of women with an increased number of men in workgroups [57]. Accordingly, gender types contrasted by birth, so we determined the gender stereotypes by positive or negative prejudgments [44, 54]. We believed that psychological safety allows you to 476 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 CTE Workshop Proceedings, 2025, Vol. 12, pp. 471–497 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 Table 1 Groups of the respondents. Groups of the respondents Frequency Valid Percent Gender female 108 62.1 male 66 37.9 Age up to 20 years 27 15.5 20-30 years 72 41.4 30-40 years 27 15.5 40-50 years 27 15.5 over 50 years 21 12.1 Place of residence village 72 41.4 town 102 58.6 Status student 132 75.9 teacher 42 24.1 Basic education social and humanitarian 123 72.4 natural and mathematical 47 27.6 fully engage in work responsibilities without fear of negative consequences for your status, career or image [29]. We also considered the age of the educational process participants in the context of their perception of the environment psychological safety. Hence, according to the researchers [27], there is a different perception of various aspects of psychological safety of different generations and, equally, age groups. Based on the results of our study, we revealed differences in the psychological safety of the educational environment depending on the status of participants in the educational process (teacher, student). This case research question was how stable the detected trend is. Moreover, we have found similar trends in other studies, such as Nembhard and Edmondson [42] of the psychological safety of the environment and professional status. We also determined the peculiarities of assessing the level of psychological safety by the place of the respondents. We assumed that there are more risks in the city to ensure the psychological safety of the educational environment than in the countryside. The basis for this assumption was the study [22], which dealt with such differences. Another controlled variable was the basic education of respondents (social and humanitarian or natural and mathematical. In this context, we counted on both our practical experience and Tsvyetkova [58] study, which indicates a difference in the value and meaning of teachers of different specialities. The author emphasizes that teachers of socio-humanitarian profile have conformist values (education, self-control), and more dependent on socio-political ideology; teachers of natural sciences and mathematics are based on individualistic values (independence, boldness, rationalism), independence of thinking from political events, focus on rigidly fixed laws, patterns, principles [58]. Based on these considerations, the following research hypotheses were formulated. 𝐻1: The psychological safety of the educational environment of the higher educa- tion institution and, as a result, the subjective well-being of the participants in the educational process in a pandemic have deteriorated. 𝐻2 Participants in the educational process are different: gender (𝐻3−1), age (𝐻3− 2), 477 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 CTE Workshop Proceedings, 2025, Vol. 12, pp. 471–497 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 place of residence (𝐻3−3), status (𝐻3−4), basic education (𝐻3−5) differ in the levels of experience of psychological safety of the educational environment. 𝐻3: The number of respondents with a positive attitude towards distance learning and a willingness to work exclusively online has decreased. 4.2. Dynamics of indicators of psychological safety of the educational environment for participants and their subjective well-being of the educational process online Under the condition of psychological safety, a person perceives the world around him/her as emotionally safe or free from emotional pressure [55, pp. 173-188]. People who feel psychologically protected do not perceive the world and other people as a threat. A sense of psychological safety creates a pleasant interpersonal relationship and allows you to take risks to achieve high life goals [1, pp. 247-261]. Quarantine causes a crisis for society, and, in particular, education. It is well-known that during the crisis it is difficult for people (as well as for educational institutions) to fully realize their expectations and competencies. The experience of distance education in higher education institutions shows that the level of these competencies is very different. Hence, we, as a society, who strive for better higher education, have to invest wisely, strengthen universities, promote creative ideas and find resources for their implementation. It is a key prerequisite for their qualitative transformation. The effectiveness of a modern educational institution is measured not only by the quality of education but also by students’ safety and teachers’ safety. According to the results, this study in I𝑠𝑡 stage indicated the low and the average levels of psychological safety of the educational environment, i.e. in 40.1% of socionomic professions (10.3% and 25.9%, respectively), 63.8% of the respondents showed the high and very high levels (table 2). Table 2 Levels of psychological safety. Levels of safety I stage, % II stage, % low 10.3 11.8 average 25.9 33.5 high 50.0 39.4 very high 13.8 15.3 The obtained results determine the nature of the interaction, communication of the respondents of the educational process, the possibility of meeting and developing the needs of the individual in a sense of safety, maintaining and improving self-esteem, recognition, the formation of a positive self-concept, self-actualization, etc. Instead, the second stage of the study (at the end of last year) deals with the relative deterioration of psychological safety indicators for participants in the educational process: a decrease in the number of participants who rated psychological safety as high from 50% to 39.4% and an increase in the number of participants who rated safety as average (from 25.9% to 33.5%) and low (from 10.3% to 11.8%). At the same time, the share of respondents who noted the level of psychological safety of the educational environment as very high (from 13.8% to 15.3%) (differences at the level of a weak trend, 𝑝 = 0.14) increased slightly. The obtained results are consistent with the participants’ assessment of the level of psychological safety of the educational environment compared to a year ago (ta- ble 3). Respondents were asked to determine whether the psychological safety of the educational environment had changed for them during the year. Table 3 shows that less than half of the respondents (42.9%) note that the level of psychological safety has not changed. 478 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 CTE Workshop Proceedings, 2025, Vol. 12, pp. 471–497 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 Table 3 Levels of the psychological safety in the educational institution today and a year ago. Levels of safety today compared to a year ago Percent significantly worsened 8.8 worsened 12.4 practically has not changed 42.9 improved 29.4 significantly improved 6.5 One-third of respondents (29.4%) indicate an improvement, and 6.5% – a significant improvement in the level of psychological safety. Instead, every fifth participant in the survey indicates a decrease in the level of psychological safety – deterioration (12.4%) or significant deterioration (8.8%). There have been changes in the subjective well-being of participants in the educational process in a pandemic, as evidenced by their answers to the question “If you compare your psychological well-being (including mental health) now and a year ago. . . ” (table 4). Table 4 Levels of the psychological well-being (including mental health) today and a year ago. Levels of the psychological well-being compared to a year ago Percent significantly worsened 12.9 worsened 21.2 practically has not changed 47.1 improved 16.5 significantly improved 2.4 As in the previous case, only less than half of the participants (47.1%) indicate that their psychological well-being (including mental health) has practically not changed. 16.5% of respondents indicate an improvement, and 2.4% – a significant improvement in their well-being. On the other hand, one-third of the participants in the educational process noted that their psychological well-being (including mental health) deteriorated during the year (21.2%) or significantly deteriorated (12.9%). The Spearman’s rank correlation co- efficient revealed a direct, statistically significant correlation between the dynamics of changes in the psychological safety of the educational environment and the subjective well-being of participants in the educational process. We established that the deterioration of psychological safety of the educational environment is accompanied by a decrease in the level of subjective well-being of respondents, which is a confirmation (as in previous studies [3, 11]) of the relationship of these phenomena. Thus, the results indicate a partial confirmation of hypothesis 𝐻1 that the psychological safety of the educational environment of higher education institutions and, as a consequence, the subjective well-being of participants in the educational process in a pandemic has deteriorated. 4.3. Socio-demographic and organizational-professional peculiarities of psychological safety of the educational environment for participants of the educational process online By the purpose and objectives of our study, the truth of hypothesis 𝐻2 about the differences in the levels of experience of psychological safety of the educational environment by participants in the educational process depending on their socio- demographic (gender, age, place of residence), and organizational-professional (status, basic education) characteristics was tested. 479 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 CTE Workshop Proceedings, 2025, Vol. 12, pp. 471–497 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 According to the results of ANOVA, the research revealed statistically significant differences in the peculiarities of psychological safety of the educational environment of participants in the educational process depending on gender and professional status (figure 1, 𝑝 < 0.01). female male 95 100 105 110 115 gender E st im at ed m ar gi n al m ea n s student teacher Figure 1: The peculiarities of psychological safety of the educational environment of partici- pants in the educational process depending on gender and professional status. Figure 1 shows that male feel more psychologically protected than women, and students feel more psychologically protected than teachers. Similar dependencies were confirmed at repeated research, at the end of the year. This situation, in our opinion, reflects, on the one hand, the positive trends in the implementation of the student-centred approach, and on the other hand, the negative trends associated with the ambivalent position of the teacher in modern Ukrainian society. At the same time, the picture of experiencing psychological well-being at the end of the year turned out to be somewhat different. From the data given in table 5, it follows that the number of students for whom well-being has significantly deteriorated is higher than for teachers (15.0% and 5.4%, respectively). On the other hand, those students for whom the level of psychologi- cal well-being has improved are significantly less than teachers (12.0% and 32.4%, respectively) (statistically significant differences were found by criterion 𝜒2, 𝑝<0.05). Table 5 Levels of the psychological well-being (including mental health) of students and teachers today and a year ago, 𝑝 <0.05. Levels of the psychological well-being compared to a year ago Percent students teachers significantly worsened 15.0* 5.4* worsened 20.3* 24.3* practically has not changed 50.4* 35.1* improved 12.0* 32.4* significantly improved 2.3* 2.7* We attribute these results to the pandemic situation – a reasonably large number of respondents became ill with COVID-19 (fortunately, there were no fatalities among them), so it had a negative impact on their mental state. Based on our experience 480 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 CTE Workshop Proceedings, 2025, Vol. 12, pp. 471–497 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 of interacting with such students, some of them even refused to turn on their video cameras in class, citing poor appearance and the fact that they have not yet fully recovered from the disease. For many of them, the state of the disease came as a shock: after all, the media constantly spread information about the risk of the disease, especially for the elderly and, mainly, the retired ones, respectively, they did not perceive the situation as threatening to themselves. This situation, in our view, raises the issue of the adequacy of media coverage in general and in a pandemic in particular. It is noteworthy that at the level of secondary education of Russian secondary school pupils and teachers revealed a different trend: teachers of secondary education found a higher level of psychological safety than students [4]. The latter, according to researchers may indicate that the psychological safety of the educational environment for the teachers and the students can be determined by various factors [3, p. 94]. Also, the age-related characteristics of the experience of psychological safety by participants in the educational process were confirmed and even became more pro- nounced. At the first stage, at the beginning of the year. Furthermore, according to the age of participants in the educational process, 2 categories of respondents feel more protected. Firstly, it is young people (up to 20 years old) – mostly students, which indicates, in our opinion, the gradual implementation of the student-centred approach in higher education. Secondly, senior responds over the age of 50 (mostly teachers who have acquired professional status, have degrees and titles) and are well established in their educational institution (differences in the level of trends, 𝑝 = 0.103). The second phase of the study at the end of the year draws attention to a certain decrease (compared to previous data) in levels of psychological safety for young people (up to 20 years old) and senior responses over the age of 50 with the general preservation and strengthening of the previously identified trend (figure 2, 𝑝<0.01). Furthermore, according to the results of ANOVA, the results showed the peculiarities up to 20 ye ar s 20 -3 0 ye ar s 30 -4 0 ye ar s 40 -5 0 ye ar s ov er 50 ye ar s 90 100 110 120 age E st im at ed m ar gi n al m ea n s student teacher Figure 2: The peculiarities of psychological safety of the educational environment of partici- pants in the educational process depending on age and professional status. 481 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 CTE Workshop Proceedings, 2025, Vol. 12, pp. 471–497 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 of the experience of psychological safety by participants in the educational environ- ment depending on their place of residence (figure 3, at the level of a weak trend, 𝑝 = 0.17). Figure 3 shows lower indicators of psychological safety for participants in the educational process living in the city. This situation is especially noticeable in students. We clarify this state of affairs precisely by the specifics of the place of residence and, in particular, by the artificial restriction of a significant number of contacts to which those who live in the city are accustomed. village town 104 106 108 110 112 place of residence E st im at ed m ar gi n al m ea n s student teacher Figure 3: The peculiarities of psychological safety of the educational environment of partici- pants in the educational process depending on age and professional status. For participants from villages, this situation is less emotional due to fewer direct contacts for villagers. In the rural type of life, a certain rhythm of life is stricter; there is less choice of occupations, a narrowed space of communication. Our assumption about features of psychological safety of educational environment for participants of educational process with various education was confirmed (figure 4, at the level of weak tendency, 𝑝 = 0.16). Figure 4 displays that in the case of the social and humanitarian orientation of the participants in the educational process, the psychological safety of the educational environment is perceived higher than for representatives of natural and mathematical education. The obtained results are consistent with the data of Gilemkhanova [22] according to which, there is an impressively higher level of the rigour of the risk of socio- psychological safety in the educational environment in cities and towns than in the village. The researcher notes that the contextual factors have lower links with the socio- psychological safety index, as contrasted with other personal points. The practical value of this study is that this information helps to objectively assess the risks of social and psychological safety in a particular educational environment. It is also necessary to take timely preventive measures in the most stressful institutions in terms of psychological safety. Increasing psychological prevention work with students with different risk indicators is more relevant [26, 42]. A detailed analysis of the results revealed both the most problematic and relatively favourable areas of psychological safety for participants in the educational process, which are somewhat different for teachers and students (tables 6, 7). Thus, according to the results of the first stage students feel protected in the follow- 482 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 CTE Workshop Proceedings, 2025, Vol. 12, pp. 471–497 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 so cia l a nd hu m an ita ria n ed uca tio n na tu ra l a nd m at he m at ica l e du ca tio n 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 education E st im at ed m ar gi n al m ea n s Figure 4: The peculiarities of psychological safety of the educational environment of partici- pants in the educational process depending on base education and professional status ing aspects of their educational activities: continuous improvement of professional skills (54%), development of abilities (54%), the opportunity to express their points of view (48%), ask for help (46.8%). According to the second section, the picture has changed somewhat: the students’ positive assessment of what has increased work in a higher education institution requires constant improvement of professional skills (73.7%). Instead, the benefits of the educational environment in terms of interpersonal rela- tionships have diminished significantly. Thus, according to students, the opportunity to express their point of view has significantly decreased (24.8%). It also became smaller the opportunity to ask for help (39.8%) (table 6). Instead, according to the results of the first stage students feel psychologically unprotected because of the negative mood at work they do (21.5%); public humiliation: by students (19.9%), teachers (22.3%), administration (23.8%), being ignored by the administration (16.6%) and threats from the administration (11.9%). At the end of the year, the situation in this context somewhat eased, but new threats to the psychological safety of the educational environment appeared, in particular, protection from an unfriendly attitude of students decreased, the low level of which was found in 8.3% of students compared to 1.5% at the beginning of the research (table 6). Similar dynamics of views on various aspects of psychological safety of the educa- tional environment is found in teachers. Thus, the results of the first stage teachers feel more psychologically safe in the constant improvement of professional skills 483 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 CTE Workshop Proceedings, 2025, Vol. 12, pp. 471–497 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 Table 6 Some questions about the psychological safety of the high education students. Problem areas of psychological safety The low level of safety % I stage II stage The mood at your work that you do 21.5 21.1 Protection from public humiliation: by students 19.9 8.3 by teachers 22.3 6.2 by the administration 23.8 11.3 Protection from being ignored by the administration 16.6 9.8 Protection from threats from the administration 11.9 7.5 Protection from unfriendly attitude of students 1.5 8.3 Relatively favourable areas of psychological safety The very high level of safety, % I stage II stage Working in your educational institution requires con- stant improvement of professional skills 54.0 73.7 The work you have to do helps to develop your abilities 54.0 50.4 The opportunity to express your point of view 48.0 24.8 Opportunity to ask for help 46.8 39.8 Table 7 Some questions about the psychological safety of the high education teachers. Problem areas of psychological safety The low level of safety % I stage II stage Protection from public humiliation: by students 24.9 35.1 colleagues 39.8 32.4 by the administration 27.3 10.8 Protection from threats from by students 31.3 37.8 by teachers 43.8 37.8 by the administration 25.0 21.6 Relationships with colleagues 37.5 8.1 The opportunity to express your point of view 25.0 5.4 Opportunity to show initiative, activity 37.5 8.1 Opportunity to ask for help 25.0 8.1 Taking into account personal problems and difficulties 25.0 10.8 Protection from the fact that the administration will force you to do anything against your will 2.7 13.5 Relatively favourable areas of psychological safety The very high level of safety, % I stage II stage Working in your educational institution requires con- stant improvement of professional skills 45.8 97.3 The work you have to do helps to develop your abilities 33.3 83.8 The mood in your work that you do 41.7 35.1 (45.8%), the development of their abilities in the process of work (33.3%), and getting pleasure from their activities (41.7%). Instead, according to the second section, the picture has changed: teachers’ positive assessment that the work in a higher education institution requires constant improve- ment of professional skills has increased significantly (from 45.8% to 97.3%), also, that the development of their abilities in the process of work (from 33.3% to 83.8%). In our opinion, this is explained by the need to master new digital technologies to perform their duties well in the conditions of mass transition to distance learning. 484 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 CTE Workshop Proceedings, 2025, Vol. 12, pp. 471–497 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 Instead, the mood in a teachers ‘work that they do worsen (from 41.7% to 35.1%) (table 7). However, according to the results of the first stage they are psychologically un- protected from public humiliation as a devaluation of the teacher’s professional achievements, groundless criticism in the presence of others, especially by colleagues (39.8%), administration (27.3%); threats from students (31.3%), colleagues (43.8%), administration (25%). Besides, there are problems with the manifestation of initiative activity (37.5%), expressing their point of view (25%), receiving some help (25%), taking into account their problems and difficulties in professional activities (25%). At the end of the year, these threats to teachers mostly decreased, in particular, they were psychologically unprotected from public humiliation, especially by colleagues (32.4%), administration (10.8%); threats from colleagues (37.8%), administration (21.6%). Besides, there are problems with the manifestation of initiative activity (8.1%), expressing their point of view (5.4%), receiving some help 10.8%). Besides, there is an increase in experience psychologically unprotected from public humiliation by students from 24.9% to 35.1%. At the same time, there are trends for new challenges in the context of the psy- chological safety of the educational environment: the threat that the administration will force teachers to do anything against them will increase from 1.5% to 13.5%. A possible explanation for the established results may be a much smaller number of direct contacts of teachers with colleagues, on the one hand, and a decrease in the possibility of direct influence on students, on the other. In the latter case, the student may be formally present at the lesson, but for various reasons “hide” behind the author, which accordingly complicates the ability to control the quality of his inclusion in the lesson (table 7). From the data of table 7, it follows that for teachers of higher education it is possible to state an imbalance between relatively favourable and problematic areas of psychological safety of the educational environment towards the latter. Besides, the problem of compensation for those socio-psychological mechanisms of influence on the educational activity of students, which were involved in the educa- tional process in full-time form and, accordingly, direct interpersonal communication. In general, it is stated that the hypothesis that the participants in the educational process are different: gender (𝐻3−1), age (𝐻3−2), place of residence (𝐻3−3), status (𝐻3−4), basic education (𝐻3−5) – differ in the levels of experience of psychological safety of the educational environment as a whole confirmed. The received information on social-demographic and organizational-professional features of psychological safety of participants of the educational environment it is expedient to consider at the organization of their psychological support and support in the conditions of training online. 4.4. Survey of participants in the educational process on their attitude to the peculiarities of learning under the conditions of the COVID-19 pandemic Thus, to study the peculiarities of learning and the attitude of participants to it, we sought to learn about the sources, online resources where participants in the educational process obtain information. Accordingly, the respondents – representatives of socionomic professions use the Internet search engines, specialized resources, sites, archives, databases via the Internet (13.3%), social networks (Viber (16.7%), Facebook (13.3), Instagram (6.7%), Telegram (9.9%), Skype (13.3%), and media (27.8%) to obtain information. It is clear that, as the distinguished reviewer noted, Internet is used in order to search for information using search engines, specialized resources, sites, archives, databases via the Internet. But we were interested in the psychological aspect of the fact of using 485 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 CTE Workshop Proceedings, 2025, Vol. 12, pp. 471–497 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 the Internet, in general. We understood psychological humiliation as public humilia- tion by colleagues and administration as a devaluation of the teacher’s professional achievements, groundless criticism in the presence of others. In further editing, if necessary, we can further detail the content of the psychological safety indicators. Participants in the educational process use e-books (27.8%), gadgets (33.4%), and personal computers (16.7%), laptops (22.1%). A small part of the respondents uses various means (16.7%). The educational process manages mainly through such online services as Zoom (33.4%), Google Meet (16.7%), BigBlueButton (3.3%), Moodle (13.3%) and Google applications (23.3%), which allows organizing conferences and webinars for different numbers of users and speakers. At the end of the year according to the survey the respondents – representatives of socionomic professions use the Internet (33.3%), social networks (Viber (9.7%), Facebook 14.3), Instagram (16.7%), Telegram (19.9%), Skype (2.3%), and media (3.8%) to obtain information. Participants in the educational process use e-books, NAES repository (14.4%), videos recommended by the Ministry of Education and Science (13.4%), gadgets (23.4%), and personal computers (26.7%), laptops 25.1%). A small part of the respondents uses various means (13.7%). The educational process manages mainly through such online services as Zoom (33.4%), Google Meet (16.7%), BigBlueButton (3.3%), Google Class (22.2%), Moodle (13.3%), Google Jamboard (11.1%), and Google applications (53.3%), which allows organizing conferences and webinars for different numbers of users and speakers. Thus, during the quarantine period, teachers and students are forced to use Internet resources. Quality online classes require the teacher to improve personal skills in working with online sources and platforms, as well as to master new information resources (Asana, Google Docs, Wiki, Dropbox, Google Jamboard, Kahoot, Miro board, Dashboard, Mentimeter etc.). Besides, to positively influence the level of student achievement in the conditions of distance learning, it is necessary to create a wide variety of test tasks. After all, in contrast to the classroom conditions during practical classes, the student online may: prepare for as much time as he needs; pass about a hundred tests of one topic, which cover all its aspects and allow him/her to consolidate the lecture material; get a good knowledge of a particular topic; and, accordingly, to higher performance. We also studied what new opportunities in the context of learning were noted by the participants of the educational process during the quarantine period. At the same time, according to criterion 𝜒2 statistically significant differences in the choice of classes of students and teachers were stated (table 8, 𝑝 < 0.05). Table 8 Features of activity of participants of educational process during the quarantine period. What measures, actions did you take for your own Percent development during the quarantine period? students teachers mastered the online course 23.3 40.5 passed internships 6.8 13.5 passed advanced training courses 32.3 21.6 read a lot 10.5 16.2 increased the amount of communication on social networks 11.3 2.7 did nothing but current affairs 15.8 5.4 Table 8 shows that teachers, in general, were more active than students in choosing constructive forms of activity during quarantine and forced isolation. Accordingly, 486 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 CTE Workshop Proceedings, 2025, Vol. 12, pp. 471–497 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 while engaging the process of education during the quarantine period, teachers have higher activities in mastering the online course (40.5%) and passing internship (13.5%) and reading a lot (16.2%) than students (23.3%, 6.8% and 10.5% respectively). Thus, students have higher activities in the following actions: passing advanced training courses (32.3%), increasing the amount of communication on social networks (11.3%) and doing nothing but current affairs (15.8) than teachers (21.6%, 2.7% and 5.4% respectively). Thus, the most important activity for teaches is to master the online course, whereas for students – to pass advanced training courses. Despite this, the less important for teachers is to increase the amount of communication on social networks, whereas for students – to pass internship. We paid special attention to studying the attitude of participants in the educational process to the peculiarities of learning in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. We asked them to answer questions on various aspects of learning. Thus, we were interested in how much the educational institution contributes to the psychological safety of participants in the educational process. Only a quarter of respondents believe that the educational institution partly facilitates (25%). But a third of respondents (27.1%) indicates the opposite, i.e. does not contribute to the creation of psychological safety in participants. At the same time, almost half of the respondents (47.9%) reflect stress caused by quarantine. Importantly, distance learning cannot fully provide the ability to express emotions, feelings, and the ability to listen and hear, convince each other, sensuality, experience, the formation of moral, spiritual, and value spheres of the participants. Half of the participants in the educational process (52.1%) are satisfied with the form of distance learning. However, 54.2% of people consider mixed full-time and distance learning to be the optimal form for them (table 9). Table 9 The participants’ attitude of the educational process to the peculiarities of distance learning under the COVID-19 conditions. The participants’ attitude I stage, % II stage, % Does the educational institution contribute to your psychological safety under the conditions of the COVID-19? on the contrary, under conditions of quarantine it causes stress 27.1 8.1 partly facilitate 47.9 13.5 facilitate 25.0 78.4 Is distance learning comfortable for you? uncomfortable 37.5 35.1 not quite so, I would like more F2F communication 10.4 29.7 comfortable 52.1 35.1 What form of training is optimal for you? distance learning online 37.5 24.3 full-time learning 8.3 24.3 mixed full-time and distance learning 54.2 51.4 The results of the study on the educational process participants’ attitude to the peculiarities of distance learning under the COVID-19 conditions are of interesting. According to the results of the first stage, the participants mostly feel the psychological safety from the educational institution under the conditions of the COVID-19 “partly facilitate” (47.9%), then “on the contrary, under conditions of quarantine it causes stress” (27.1%) and “facilitate” (25.0%). However, the results have changed a bit at the end of the educational year according to the second stage, i.e. the participants of educational process feel more safety psychologically from the educational institution 487 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 CTE Workshop Proceedings, 2025, Vol. 12, pp. 471–497 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 under the conditions of the COVID-19 “facilitate” (78.4%), “partly facilitate” (13.5%), and “on the contrary, under conditions of quarantine it causes stress” (8.1%). Moreover, the results of the table 9 show the state of being comfortable during distance learning, i.e. of the first stage the participants of educational process mostly feel “comfortable” themselves (52.1%) than “uncomfortable” (37.5%) and “Not quite so, I would like more F2F communication” (10.4%). Still, the results of the second stage display the participants of the educational process have the same attitude to the state of being “comfortable” and “uncomfortable” (35.1%). Furthermore, the third section of table 9 due to the optimal form of training demonstrates chiefly equal results for the first and second stage, i.e. the highest state is “mixed full-time and distance learning” (54.1% and 51.4% respectively), then for the first stage there is the sequence of preferences: “distance learning online” (37.5%) and “full-time learning” (8.3%), but for the second stage there is no sequence, just the equal results for both preferences (24.3% each). Thus, the results show the appropriate change of the educational process partici- pants’ attitude to the peculiarities of distance learning under the COVID-19 conditions. Hence, there takes place the participants’ desirability of full-time learning alike dis- tance learning. Its absence not only causes negative emotions of participants in the educational process but, also, negatively affects their academic success in the future [36]. The researchers note that the missing school for a prolonged period will likely have impacts on student achievement. Furthermore, students likely are returning this fall with greater variability in their academic skills. Taking into consideration the research about students, who suffered from Hurricane Katrina [25], it is urgent to make all the comfortable conditions without learning loss for the participants of the educational process during COVID-19. Additionally, it is vital to empower educational leaders to protect the participants of the educational process and “researchers to make urgent evidence-informed post–COVID-19 recovery decisions” [36, p. 562]. Without a doubt, there are numerous studies and practical experience of distance learning, which testifies to its advantages. Thus, in recent years, Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) opportunities have been widely discussed as they are “one of the most prominent trends in higher education in recent years” [7, p. 427]. It is a well-known trend for distance education which gathered all the education process participants all over the world to share the educational content on the online platforms around the US and Europe, like Coursera, EdX, Udacity, Udemy, Iversity, MiriadaX, and Futurelearn [7, p. 428]. These courses are generally formed, set, and led by academics through open source web platforms [23, 39, 53, 60, 63]. Moreover, the changes in communication technologies play a significant role in social life and create new opportunities in the field of education. Nowadays, the most meaningful change in communication technologies is the communication structure of people and organizations. Thus in the communication medium is evident the interactivity. There are several advantages of communication technologies under the conditions of COVID-19 or quarantine periods, i.e. establishing intensive communication through new media technologies and social media; all the participants of the educational process may receive the information transmitted to a large community; students have an ability to gain the knowledge of communicating by e-mail other than social media; distance learning platform is considered as a place in the life-long learning process; and of urgent, it is the chance to create new opportunities in the field of education. [13, pp. 636-640]. But the fundamental difference in the current situation is the compulsory nature of 488 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 CTE Workshop Proceedings, 2025, Vol. 12, pp. 471–497 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 distance learning within formal education through quarantine safety measures. That is why, in our opinion, the question “Are you ready to fully switch to online learning?” a relatively small number of respondents answered in the affirmative. At the same time, statistically significant differences in the answers of students and teachers were stated according to criterion 𝜒2 (table 10, 𝑝<0.05). Table 10 The participants’ readiness of the educational process to fully switch to online learning. Are you ready to fully switch to online learning Percent students teachers yes 33.1 18.9 no 18.9 29.7 mixed form of education 34.6 51.4 di st an ce lea rn in g on lin e fu ll- tim e lea rn in g m ix ed fu ll- tim e an d di st an ce lea rn in g85 90 95 100 105 110 115 What form of training is optimal for you E st im at ed m ar gi n al m ea n s student teacher Figure 5: Peculiarities of psychological safety of the educational environment for adherents of various forms of education (𝑝 < 0.05). Table 10 shows that only 33.1% of students and 18.9% of teachers expressed a willingness to switch entirely for online learning. A vital number of respondents are supporters of mixed, full-time and distance learning (34.6% of students and 54.1% of teachers). At the same time, almost a fifth student (18.9%) and every third teacher (33.1%) oppose the full transition to online learning. The research pointed out the statistically significant differences in the peculiarities of psychological safety of the educational environment for adherents of forms of learning according to the results of ANOVA (figure 5, 𝑝 < 0.05). 489 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 CTE Workshop Proceedings, 2025, Vol. 12, pp. 471–497 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 ye s no m ix ed fo rm of ed uca tio n 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 Are you ready to fully switch to online learning? E st im at ed m ar gi n al m ea n s student teacher Figure 6: Peculiarities of psychological safety of the educational environment up to the willingness to fully switch to online learning (𝑝 < 0.05). So, figure 5 shows that adherents of full-time and mixed forms of learning feel themselves as the most secured, whereas adherents of distance learning perceive the educational environment as much less psychologically safe. The obtained results are confirmed by the assessment of the participants of the educational process of their readiness to completely switch to distance learning (figure 6, 𝑝 < 0.05). Figure 6 shows that for those participants in the educational process who are not ready to completely switch to online learning, the indicators of psychological safety of the educational environment are the lowest. Also of interest are the results of the analysis of the dynamics of psychological well-being of participants in the educational process – supporters of various forms of education over the past year (figure 7, 𝑝 < 0.01). Figure 7 displays that it is possible to state positive dynamics of psychological well-being during quarantine at those participants of the educational process who are supporters of the mixed form of training which experience they partially had last year. Significantly lower levels of psychological well-being were found in supporters of distance learning and, especially, full-time education (𝑝<0.01). Therefore, it is not surprising that the results of improving the psychological well- being of those participants in the educational process who due to certain circum- stances have changed their attitude to distance learning over the past year in a positive direction (figure 8, 𝑝 < 0.01). Figure 8 shows that with the improvement of the attitude to distance learning, the indicators of psychological well-being of participants in the educational process also increase. In contrast, for those whose attitudes toward distance learning have deteriorated, psychological well-being also decreased (𝑝 < 0.01). Such results testify to expediency and extreme urgency of appropriate psychological 490 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 CTE Workshop Proceedings, 2025, Vol. 12, pp. 471–497 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 di st an ce lea rn in g on lin e fu ll- tim e lea rn in g m ix ed fu ll- tim e an d di st an ce lea rn in g98 100 102 104 106 108 110 112 What form of training is optimal for you E st im at ed m ar gi n al m ea n s Figure 7: Dynamics of psychological well-being during quarantine for supporters of other forms of learning (𝑝 < 0.01). support of participants of the educational process whose relation to distance learning in the conditions of quarantine restrictions has worsened recently. The obtained results indicate the possibility of using a mixed form of education in the future, as the knowledge, skills and abilities acquired in the COVID-19 pandemic are relevant and in demand for a sustainable society, support for 21st-century skills development through ICT and others [51]. On the other hand, it seems appropriate to develop a programme of psychological support for participants in the educational process of learning in a pandemic. Such a programme, as evidenced by “the evaluation of the deferred efficiency of the formative psychological impact in the educational environment” [2], may also help increase the psychological security of the educational environment. 5. Conclusions In this paper, we have investigated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the psychological safety and subjective well-being of the participants of the educational process in higher education institutions. We have conducted a comparative analysis of the pre-pandemic and post-pandemic data collected from students and teachers of different disciplines, genders, ages, and locations. Our main findings are: • The psychological safety of the educational environment affects the subjective well-being of the participants of the educational process. The subjective well- being of both students and teachers has decreased significantly during the pandemic. 491 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 CTE Workshop Proceedings, 2025, Vol. 12, pp. 471–497 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 sig ni fic an tly wor se ne d wor se ne d pr ac tic al ly ha s no t ch an ge d im pr ov ed sig ni fic an tly im pr ov ed 1 2 3 4 5 If you compare your sense of psychological security and comfort in an educational institution today and a year ago E st im at ed m ar gi n al m ea n s student teacher Figure 8: Correlation between positive dynamics of psychological well-being during quarantine and attitude to distance learning (𝑝 < 0.01). • There are significant differences in the levels of psychological safety among differ- ent groups of participants. In particular, women, students, urban residents, and representatives of natural and mathematical education experience lower levels of psychological safety than men, teachers, rural residents, and representatives of social and humanitarian education. • The pandemic has also changed the attitudes of the participants towards the modes of learning. While half of the participants are satisfied with the distance learning mode, the other half prefer a mixed mode of full-time and distance learning. The lack of open communication and feedback is one of the main factors that negatively affect the satisfaction of the participants with the distance learning mode. Based on these findings, we suggest that higher education institutions should adopt a mixed mode of learning that combines the advantages of both full-time and distance learning modes. This would require a change in policy and the implementation of appropriate reforms that would facilitate the mastery of information tools by the partic- ipants. We also propose that a program of psychological support for the participants of the educational process should be developed and tested to enhance their psychological safety and subjective well-being in the pandemic situation. Declaration on generative AI: The authors declare that they have not used AI tools in the writing of this article. 492 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 CTE Workshop Proceedings, 2025, Vol. 12, pp. 471–497 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 References [1] Afolabi, O.A. and Balogun, A.G., 2017. Impacts of psychological security, emo- tional intelligence and self-efficacy on undergraduates’ life satisfaction. Psycho- logical Thought, 10(2), pp.247–261. Available from: https://doi.org/10.5964/ psyct.v10i2.226. [2] Baeva, I. and Shakhova, L., 2020. Evaluation of the Deferred Efficiency of the Formative Psychological Impact in the Educational Environment. Integratsiya obrazovaniya = Integration of Education, 24(3), pp.396–411. Available from: https://doi.org/10.15507/1991-9468.100.024.202003.396-411. [3] Baeva, I.A., 2020. Psikhologicheskaia bezopasnost obrazovatelnoi sredy: kak ee sozdat i izmerit. Ekopsikhologicheskiye issledovaniya–6: ekologiya detstva i psikhologiya ustoychivogo razvitiya. [4] Baeva, I.A. and Bordovskaia, N.V., 2015. The psychological safety of the ed- ucational environment and the psychological well-being of Russian secondary school pupils and teachers. Psychology in Russia: State of the Art, 8(1), pp.86–99. Available from: https://doi.org/10.11621/pir.2015.0108. [5] Bailey-Findley, C., 2019. How to Stop Interruptions so you can Focus. Available from: http://cavemaninasuit.com/ how-to-stop-interruptions-so-you-can-focus/. [6] Balakhtar, V.V., 2018. Influence of information and communication technologies for forming professional personal competence of social work specialist. Information Technologies and Learning Tools, 66(4), pp.93–104. Available from: https://doi. org/10.33407/itlt.v66i4.2066. [7] Baturay, M.H., 2015. An Overview of the World of MOOCs. Procedia - social and behavioral sciences, 174, pp.427–433. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. sbspro.2015.01.685. [8] Bondarchuk, O., 2018. Psychological safety of the educational environment in secondary schools as a factor of innovative activities motivation for the Ukrainian teachers. Studia Universitatis Moldaviae – S, tiint,e ale Educat, iei, (9 (119)). Available from: http://ojs.studiamsu.eu/index.php/education/article/view/1208. [9] Bondarchuk, O., Balakhtar, V. and Balakhtar, K., 2020. Monitoring of the quality of the psychological component of teachers’ activity of higher education institutions based on Google Forms. E3s web of conferences, 166, p.10024. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202016610024. [10] Bondarchuk, O., Balakhtar, V., Gorova, O., Lytvynenko, N., Pinchuk, N., Shmanko, O., Kiv, A. and Oleksiuk, V., 2022. Features of responsibility of future specialists of the socionomic professions as an indicator of their digital competence. Educational Technology Quarterly, 2022(1), p.35–55. Available from: https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.12. [11] Bondarchuk, O.I., 2018. Psychological security of the educational environment: the essence and conditions of creation [Psykholohichna bezpeka osvitnioho sere- dovyshcha: sutnist ta umovy stvorennya]. [12] Breuer, C., Hüffmeier, J. and Hertel, G., 2016. Does trust matter more in virtual teams? A meta-analysis of trust and team effectiveness considering virtuality and documentation as moderators. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(8), p.1151. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000113. [13] Büyükbaykal, C.I., 2015. Communication Technologies and Education in the Information Age. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, pp.636–640. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.594. [14] Callahan, A.M., 2004. The Role of Demographic Diversity in Predicting Worker Psychological Safety. Ph.D. thesis. University of Tennessee. Available from: 493 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 https://doi.org/10.5964/psyct.v10i2.226 https://doi.org/10.5964/psyct.v10i2.226 https://doi.org/10.15507/1991-9468.100.024.202003.396-411 https://doi.org/10.11621/pir.2015.0108 http://cavemaninasuit.com/how-to-stop-interruptions-so-you-can-focus/ http://cavemaninasuit.com/how-to-stop-interruptions-so-you-can-focus/ https://doi.org/10.33407/itlt.v66i4.2066 https://doi.org/10.33407/itlt.v66i4.2066 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.685 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.685 http://ojs.studiamsu.eu/index.php/education/article/view/1208 https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202016610024 https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.12 https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000113 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.594 CTE Workshop Proceedings, 2025, Vol. 12, pp. 471–497 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/1961/. [15] Carambas, J.R. and Espique, F.P., 2023. Lived experiences of teachers and stu- dents in distance education: shift from traditional to online learning. Educational Technology Quarterly. Available from: https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.606. [16] Clark, T.R., 2020. Crisis leadership: How to give people psychologi- cal safety. Available from: https://enterprisersproject.com/article/2020/3/ crisis-leadership-how-create-psychological-safety. [17] Congelos, N., 2020. Building psichological safety and trust vir- tually. Available from: https://www.hubspot.com/careers-blog/ building-psychological-safety-virtually. [18] Costello, K., 2020. Increase team performance and empower employees dur- ing the uncertainties of coronavirus by creating a psychologically safe en- vironment. Available from: https://www.gartner.com/smarterwithgartner/ cios-play-a-key-role-in-improving-psychological-safety. [19] Council Recommendation on Key Competences for Lifelong Learning, 2018. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/education/education-in-the-eu/ council-recommendation-on-key-competences-for-lifelong-learning_en. [20] Edmondson, A., 1999. Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), pp.350–383. Available from: https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999. [21] Edmondson, A.C. and Lei, Z., 2014. Psychological Safety: The History, Renais- sance, and Future of an Interpersonal Construct. Annual Review of Organiza- tional Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1(1), pp.23–43. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091305. [22] Gilemkhanova, E.N., 2019. Socio-Psychological Safety of Schools in the Context of the Settlement Type and Socio-Economic Status of the Region. Behavioral Sciences, 9(12), p.139. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3390/bs9120139. [23] Glazunova, O.G., Korolchuk, V.I., Parhomenko, O.V., Voloshyna, T.V., Morze, N.V. and Smyrnova-Trybulska, E.M., 2023. A methodology for flipped learning in a cloud-oriented environment: enhancing future IT specialists’ training. Educational Technology Quarterly, 2023(3), p.233–255. Available from: https://doi.org/10. 55056/etq.629. [24] Goller, I. and Laufer, T., 2018. Psychologische Sicherheit in Unternehmen: Wie Hochleistungsteams wirklich funktionieren. Gabler Verlag. Available from: https: //doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-21338-1. [25] Harris, D.N. and Larsen, M.F., 2019. The effects of the New Or- leans post-Katrina market-based school reforms on medium-term student outcomes. Available from: http://web.archive.org/web/ 20210204180854/https://educationresearchalliancenola.org/files/ publications/Harris-Larsen-Reform-Effects-2019-08-01.pdf. [26] Hinduja, S. and Patchin, J.W., 2010. Bullying, cyberbullying, and suicide. Archives of suicide research, 14(3), pp.206–221. Available from: https://doi.org/ 10.1080/13811118.2010.494133. [27] How to Talk to Every Generation About Psychological Safety, 2019. Available from: https://safetyfocus.assp.org/blog/ how-to-talk-to-every-generation-about-psychological-safety. [28] Iyer, S.S., Gernal, L., Subramanian, R. and Mehrotra, A., 2023. Impact of digital disruption influencing business continuity in UAE higher education. Educational Technology Quarterly, 2023(1), p.18–57. Available from: https://doi.org/10. 55056/etq.29. [29] Kahn, W.A., 1990. Psychological Conditions of Personal Engagement and Disen- gagement at Work. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), pp.692–724. Available 494 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/1961/ https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.606 https://enterprisersproject.com/article/2020/3/crisis-leadership-how-create-psychological-safety https://enterprisersproject.com/article/2020/3/crisis-leadership-how-create-psychological-safety https://www.hubspot.com/careers-blog/building-psychological-safety-virtually https://www.hubspot.com/careers-blog/building-psychological-safety-virtually https://www.gartner.com/smarterwithgartner/cios-play-a-key-role-in-improving-psychological-safety https://www.gartner.com/smarterwithgartner/cios-play-a-key-role-in-improving-psychological-safety https://ec.europa.eu/education/education-in-the-eu/council-recommendation-on-key-competences-for-lifelong-learning_en https://ec.europa.eu/education/education-in-the-eu/council-recommendation-on-key-competences-for-lifelong-learning_en https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999 https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091305 https://doi.org/10.3390/bs9120139 https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.629 https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.629 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-21338-1 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-21338-1 http://web.archive.org/web/20210204180854/https://educationresearchalliancenola.org/files/publications/Harris-Larsen-Reform-Effects-2019-08-01.pdf http://web.archive.org/web/20210204180854/https://educationresearchalliancenola.org/files/publications/Harris-Larsen-Reform-Effects-2019-08-01.pdf http://web.archive.org/web/20210204180854/https://educationresearchalliancenola.org/files/publications/Harris-Larsen-Reform-Effects-2019-08-01.pdf https://doi.org/10.1080/13811118.2010.494133 https://doi.org/10.1080/13811118.2010.494133 https://safetyfocus.assp.org/blog/how-to-talk-to-every-generation-about-psychological-safety https://safetyfocus.assp.org/blog/how-to-talk-to-every-generation-about-psychological-safety https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.29 https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.29 CTE Workshop Proceedings, 2025, Vol. 12, pp. 471–497 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 from: https://doi.org/10.5465/256287. [30] Kalashnikova, L., Hrabovets, I., Chernous, L., Chorna, V. and Kiv, A., 2022. Gamification as a trend in organizing professional education of sociologists in the context of distance learning: analysis of practices. Educational Technology Quarterly, 2022(2), p.115–128. Available from: https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.2. [31] Kapucu, N.K. and Salih, U., 2020. Üniversitelerde ortak zorunlu derslerin öğreti- minde uzaktan eğitim uygulamaları. Açıköğretim uygulamaları ve araştırmaları dergisi, 6(1), pp.8–27. Available from: https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/auad/ issue/55639/761236. [32] Kartashova, L.A., Bakhmat, N.V. and Plish, I.V., 2018. Development of teacher’s digital competency in terms of information and educational environment of a secondary education establishment. Information Technologies and Learning Tools, 68(6), pp.193–205. Available from: https://doi.org/10.33407/itlt.v68i6.2543. [33] Keeping the doors of learning open, 2020. Available from: https://www.col.org/ resources/keeping-doors-learning-open-covid-19. [34] Kiv, A., Shyshkina, M., Semerikov, S., Striuk, A. and Yechkalo, Y., 2020. AREdu 2019 – How augmented reality transforms to augmented learning. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 2547, pp.1–12. [35] Kremen, V.H., ed., 2020. Psychology and education infighting COVID-19: online manual. Yurka Lyubchenka. Available from: https://drive.google.com/file/d/ 1yDw7bZfGo0Ny94KsbcBJWfDlcZ8wHXN9/view. [36] Kuhfeld, M., Soland, J., Tarasawa, B., Johnson, A., Ruzek, E. and Liu, J., 2020. Projecting the Potential Impact of COVID-19 School Closures on Academic Achievement. Educational Researcher, 49(8), pp.549–565. Available from: https: //doi.org/10.3102/0013189X20965918. [37] Kukharenko, V., Shunevych, B. and Kravtsov, H., 2022. Distance course ex- amination. Educational Technology Quarterly, 2022(1), p.1–19. Available from: https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.4. [38] Maslow, A.H., Hirsh, E., Stein, M. and Honigmann, I., 1945. A Clinically Derived Test for Measuring Psychological Security-Insecurity. The Journal of General Psychology, 33(1), pp.21–41. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309. 1945.10544493. [39] Massive open online courses: Higher education’s digital moment?, 2013. Available from: https://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/policy-and-analysis/reports/ Documents/2013/massive-open-online-courses.pdf. [40] Miller, A.L., 2022. Adapting to teaching restrictions during the COVID-19 pan- demic in Japanese universities. Educational Technology Quarterly, 2022(3), p.251–262. Available from: https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.21. [41] Ming, C., Xiaoying, G., Huizhen, Z. and Bin, R., 2015/04. A Review on Psy- chological Safety: Concepts, measurements, antecedents and Consequences variables. Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Social Sci- ence and Technology Education. Atlantis Press, pp.433–440. Available from: https://doi.org/10.2991/icsste-15.2015.118. [42] Nembhard, I.M. and Edmondson, A.C., 2006. Making it safe: the effects of leader inclusiveness and professional status on psychological safety and improvement efforts in health care teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27(7), pp.941– 966. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/job.413. [43] Olweus, D., 2004. Bullying at school: Prevalence estimation, a useful evaluation design, and a new national initiative in Norway. Association for Child Psychology and Psychiatry Occasional Papers, 23, pp.5–17. [44] Petrenko, L., Kravets, S., Bazeliuk, O., Maiboroda, L. and Muzyka, I., 2020. Analysis of the current state of distance learning in the vocational education and 495 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 https://doi.org/10.5465/256287 https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.2 https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/auad/issue/55639/761236 https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/auad/issue/55639/761236 https://doi.org/10.33407/itlt.v68i6.2543 https://www.col.org/resources/keeping-doors-learning-open-covid-19 https://www.col.org/resources/keeping-doors-learning-open-covid-19 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yDw7bZfGo0Ny94KsbcBJWfDlcZ8wHXN9/view https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yDw7bZfGo0Ny94KsbcBJWfDlcZ8wHXN9/view https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X20965918 https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X20965918 https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.4 https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.1945.10544493 https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.1945.10544493 https://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/policy-and-analysis/reports/Documents/2013/massive-open-online-courses.pdf https://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/policy-and-analysis/reports/Documents/2013/massive-open-online-courses.pdf https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.21 https://doi.org/10.2991/icsste-15.2015.118 https://doi.org/10.1002/job.413 CTE Workshop Proceedings, 2025, Vol. 12, pp. 471–497 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 training institutions. E3S Web of Conferences, 166, p.10010. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202016610010. [45] Pilar, O. and Middlemiss, M., 2019. Thinking remote: Inspiration for Leaders of Distributed Teams. Virtual not Distant. [46] Pinchuk, N., Pinchuk, O., Bondarchuk, O., Balakhtar, V., Balakhtar, K., Onopriienko-Kapustina, N., Shyshkina, M. and Kuzminska, O., 2022. Personal indicators of occupational stress of employees working remotely in a pandemic quarantine. Educational Technology Quarterly, 2022(2), p.129–142. Available from: https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.8. [47] Promoting psychological safety for further innovations, 2019. Available from: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nAv4xzQ9oiREgJpclRXfPeu3bA3YuNvo/view. [48] Rozovsky, J., 2015. The five keys to a successful Google team. Available from: https://rework.withgoogle.com/blog/five-keys-to-a-successful-google-team/. [49] Ryan, R.M. and Deci, E.L., 2001. On Happiness and Human Potentials: A Review of Research on Hedonic and Eudaimonic Well-Being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), pp.141–166. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1. 141. [50] Schein, E.H. and Bennis, W.G., 1965. Personal and organizational change through group methods: The laboratory approach. New York: Wiley. [51] Semerikov, S., Chukharev, S., Sakhno, S., Striuk, A., Osadchyi, V., Solovieva, V., Vakaliuk, T., Nechypurenko, P., Bondarenko, O. and Danylchuk, H., 2020. Our sustainable coronavirus future. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1051/ e3sconf/202016600001. [52] Shekhavtsova, S., Koknova, T. and Shekhavtsov, M., 2021. Using web tech- nologies in the process of development of students’ critical thinking. Ed- ucational Technology Quarterly, 2021(2), p.310–330. Available from: https: //doi.org/10.55056/etq.28. [53] Siemsen, E., Roth, A.V., Balasubramanian, S. and Anand, G., 2009. The Influence of Psychological Safety and Confidence in Knowledge on Employee Knowledge Sharing. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 11(3), p.429–447. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.1080.0233. [54] Skitka, L.J. and Maslach, C., 1990. Gender roles and the categorization of gender-relevant behavior. Sex Roles, 22(3), pp.133–150. Available from: https: //doi.org/10.1007/BF00288187. [55] Taormina, R.J. and Sun, R., 2015. Antecedents and outcomes of psychological insecurity and interpersonal trust among Chinese people. Psychological thought, 8(2). Available from: https://doi.org/10.5964/psyct.v8i2.143. [56] Trubavina, I., Vorozhbit-Gorbatyuk, V., Shtefan, M., Kalina, K. and Dzhus, O., 2021. From the experience of organizing artistic and productive activities of older preschool children by means of distance education in the conditions of quarantine measures for the spread of COVID-19. Educational Technology Quarterly, 2021(1), p.51–72. Available from: https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.56. [57] Tsui, A.S., Egan, T.D. and O’Reilly, C.A., 1992. Being different: Relational demography and organizational attachment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37(4), pp.549–579. Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2393472. [58] Tsvyetkova, H.H., 2014. Profesiyne samovdoskonalennya vykladachiv humani- tarnykh dystsyplin vyshchoyi shkoly [Professional self-improvement of teaching humanities in higher education]. [59] Vakaliuk, T., Spirin, O., Korotun, O., Antoniuk, D., Medvedieva, M. and Novitska, I., 2022. The current level of competence of schoolteachers on how to use cloud technologies in the educational process during COVID-19. Educational Technology Quarterly, 2022(3), p.232–250. Available from: https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.32. 496 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202016610010 https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.8 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nAv4xzQ9oiREgJpclRXfPeu3bA3YuNvo/view https://rework.withgoogle.com/blog/five-keys-to-a-successful-google-team/ https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.141 https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.141 https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202016600001 https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202016600001 https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.28 https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.28 https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.1080.0233 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00288187 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00288187 https://doi.org/10.5964/psyct.v8i2.143 https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.56 http://www.jstor.org/stable/2393472 https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.32 CTE Workshop Proceedings, 2025, Vol. 12, pp. 471–497 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 [60] Vakaliuk, T.A., Chyzhmotria, O.V., Chyzhmotria, O.H., Didkivska, S.O. and Kontsedailo, V.V., 2023. The use of massive open online courses in teaching the fundamentals of programming to software engineers. Educational Technology Quarterly, 2023(1), p.106–120. Available from: https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.37. [61] Vlasenko, K.V., Volkov, S.V., Lovianova, I.V., Sitak, I.V., Chumak, O.O. and Bohdanova, N.H., 2023. Exploring usability principles for educational online courses: a case study on an open platform for online education. Educational Technology Quarterly, 2023(2), p.173–187. Available from: https://doi.org/10. 55056/etq.602. [62] Weir, K., 2020. What did distance learning accomplish? Monitor on Psy- chology, 51(6), p.54. Available from: https://www.apa.org/monitor/2020/09/ distance-learning-accomplish. [63] Yadav, M., 2023. Mining student coding behaviors in a programming MOOC: there are no actionable learner stereotypes. Educational Technology Quarterly. Available from: https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.611. 497 https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.427 https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.37 https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.602 https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.602 https://www.apa.org/monitor/2020/09/distance-learning-accomplish https://www.apa.org/monitor/2020/09/distance-learning-accomplish https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.611 1 Introduction 2 Literature review 3 Methods 4 Analysis of the research results 4.1 Social and demographic characteristics of the research sample 4.2 Dynamics of indicators of psychological safety of the educational environment for participants and their subjective well-being of the educational process online 4.3 Socio-demographic and organizational-professional peculiarities of psychological safety of the educational environment for participants of the educational process online 4.4 Survey of participants in the educational process on their attitude to the peculiarities of learning under the conditions of the COVID-19 pandemic 5 Conclusions