Global Research in Higher Education ISSN 2576-196X (Print) ISSN 2576-1951 (Online) Vol. 4, No. 2, 2021 www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe 69 Original Paper Distance Learning in Greece during Covid-19 Pandemic Apostolou George 1* , Papatsimpas Achilleas 2 , Gounas Athanasios 1 & Gkouna Ourania 1 1 International Hellenic University, Greece 2 Ministry of Education, Greece * Apostolou George, International Hellenic University, Ioannina, 45333, Greece Received: May 9, 2021 Accepted: May 21, 2021 Online Published: June 3, 2021 doi:10.22158/grhe.v4n2p69 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.22158/grhe.v4n2p69 Abstract The purpose of this study is to investigate the reaction of Greeks to this new educational reality due to the Covid-19 outbreak. Since the first restrictive measures were implemented in March 2020in Greece, distance learning has become a dynamic part of people’s daily lives with the prospect of remain in gas such in the future. A total of N=170 students, parents, teachers, civil servants, private sector employees who were involved in the distance learning process either as instructors or as students in the period of Covid-19 pandemic in Greece, were selected with the use of snowball sampling. A questionnaire using demographic and satisfaction related variables was completed by the respondents, namely citizens across Greece, based on a Likert scale questionnaire which is a useful and multidimensional instrument, to assess satisfaction within the time frame from July 7, 2020 to October 20, 2020; the period when there occurred a loosening in the restrictive measures between the two lockdowns in Greece. It was investigated how the demographic factors, specifically gender, age, occupation, and place of residence, influence the attitude of the respondents towards synchronous and asynchronous distance learning as well as their intention to continue using online education services in the future after the lifting of the restrictive measures. Additionally, the customers’ preferences concerning the most enjoyable distance learning experience were examined, so that they will be available to the distance learning program designers. Descriptive statistical analysis and non-parametric statistical hypothesis tests were conducted in SPSS and R. Most of the respondents had not participated in online courses before the Covid-19 outbreak, 46 % did participate in e-learning courses before the Covid-19 lockdown while 54 % did not and 34.1% respondents prefer face-to-face learning, while 15.9% prefer e-learning. Also, 50% respondents prefer a combination of face-to-face learning and e-learning. Hypothesis tests showed that there are statistically significant differences between users’ preferences as well as regarding their demographic characteristics. Undergraduate and postgraduate university students continue to participate in online www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe Global Research in Higher Education Vol. 4, No. 2, 2021 70 Published by SCHOLINK INC. learning courses and are willing to invest financial resources and time in this new educational process (χ 2 (4)=10.440, p=0.034), unlike high school students who prefer face-to-face learning (p=0.042). The present study will lead to practical implications, such as the formation of e-learning programs which aim for the best user experience and the best learning outcomes. Also, private educational organizations can include the results in the key elements to implementing a strategic marketing mix. Keywords Covid-19, e-learning, face-to-face learning, distance learning, student experience 1. Introduction The coronavirus disease (Covid-19) outbreak has affected millions of people and threatens their lives all over the world. Most countries’ governments have ordered a lockdown and mandated that people to stay at their homes due to the transmissibility of this new virus. Therefore, the Covid-19 outbreak has brought about major changes in working conditions all over the globe within a month. In the wake of the worldwide pandemic, most sectors, ranging from economy and industries to education, were severely affected. The consequences of this pandemic have been unstoppable and uncontrollable for many industries all around the world including educational institutions. As a result, principals (headmasters), teachers, and educators in many countries have started using e-learning. The management of each educational organization is responsible for providing information for the services and curricula offered by the Learning Services Providers (LSP’s), as well as for designing innovative, cost-effective, and efficacious solutions. The implementation of innovative curricula, management models and processes ensure efficient management methods, quality services, reduced economic waste and optimal utilization of human resources. To be able to design and implement innovative schemes, what should be explored and clarified is students’ needs and the degree to which organizations offering secondary education services in Greece today were satisfactory, under the current circumstances. The LSP’s, more specifically tutorial schools, private tutors, and e-learning platforms, are involved in the educational process, as educational institutions, through the academic support that they offer to elementary and high school students as well as to autonomous students. These are provided with the purpose of filling learning gaps, assisting, and organizing the study process, as well as preparing pupils and students for their participation in exams and competitions (Papakonstantinou, 2016). 2. Market Orientation (MO): A Key Element in Educational Institutions’ Marketing Marketing Orientation is the extent to which an organization creates and uses information about current and future customer needs. It develops a strategy to meet these needs and implements it for that purpose. MO takes into consideration the influence of competitors and integrates it into interoperable co-ordination. It encourages raising awareness, using data accumulated about competitors and employ in integrated and interoperable processes to form a strategic organizational response to marketing www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe Global Research in Higher Education Vol. 4, No. 2, 2021 71 Published by SCHOLINK INC. opportunities (Slater & Narver, 2000; Harris, 2002; Helfert, Ritter, & Walter, 2002). All these activities are oriented towards creating and satisfying customers through a continuous assessment of buyers’ needs. As far as school context is concerned, it is believed that the focus on current and future clients (Parents, students) should prevail over the other two MO functions. In our opinion, MO is a set of beliefs that prioritizes customer interests but also increases the willingness of the educational organization to obtain information about its competitors and create cross-sectoral activities to gain a distinct advantage within a hectic and highly competitive environment. 3. Distance Learning Distance learning is defined as the acquisition of knowledge and skills using information and instructions provided by means of online material and courses, as opposed to both teachers and students being physically present during the educational process. Thus, E-learning is covered under a larger term of technology-based learning through websites, learning platforms, video conferencing, mobile apps, and many types of free available websites for blended learning technologies (Bower & Hardy, 2004). Currently, e-learning is enhancing students’ knowledge and is assessing the skills of academic staff through the internet (Adams et al., 2018; Chopra et al., 2019). Most higher education institutions are providing online courses for their students both within and off university campuses. Studies also show a mean growth 7.9% in e-learning annually worldwide. More specifically, the highest growth rate is in Asia with 17.3%, followed by Eastern Europe, Africa, and Latin America with 16.9%, 15.2%, and 14.6%, respectively (Rana et al., 2014). Globally, due to the Covid-19 outbreak, schools and universities halted their function and most teachers and students are satisfied with the progress of the online education. All faculty members of many recognized universities have begun to get online certifications to deliver online lessons. Currently, academic staff members and students are learning how to use the online learning platforms. Before this outbreak, mostly face-to-face teaching was used and this shift to the online courses has raised many queries on the quality of education (Sahu, 2020). Omotayo and Haliru (2020) also added that learners must be motivated to acquire digital competency for them to remain up-to-date and not let their education be impeded in times of crisis. 3.1 E Learning E-learning not only covers content (Nichols, 2003) and educational methods provided via asynchronous material, the Internet, or an Intranet (Benson et al., 2002; Clark, 2002) but also includes audio and video material, satellite broadcasting, and interactive television (Ellis, 2004). Thus, there is some level of interaction in the learning process (Moore et al., 2010). 3.2 The Importance of Online Learning in the Time of Covid-19 Crisis The Covid-19 effects can be seen in schools, colleges, and universities. Subsequently, all these online learning platforms can be viewed as a panacea for the crisis. The Covid-19 outbreak has made educational institutions switch from the offline pedagogy mode to online pedagogy. Crisis will force www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe Global Research in Higher Education Vol. 4, No. 2, 2021 72 Published by SCHOLINK INC. the educational institutions (which had earlier demonstrated reluctance to change) to accept modern technology. Internet is the state-of-the-art technology that allows both asynchronous distance learning (two-way communication involving intervals between sending and receiving) and synchronous (direct communication without delay), teleconferencing and online chat, which can be used for student-to-student interaction, among students, teachers, but also within large groups of people. The Internet also provides access to digitized educational materials, scholarly articles, books, and current reports. It allows students to take lessons according to their lifestyle and daily schedule, instead of having to compromise with a set time and location. Therefore, it allows students who are unable to get an education due to geographical distance, personal disability, or physical disability, to have access to it (Inman, Kerwin, & Mayes, 1999). This crisis will show us the lucrative side of online teaching and learning as with the aid of the online teaching tools, we can coordinate many students at any time and in any part of the world. All institutions must use technology more aptly and many universities around the world fully use their digital operations understanding the imposed need that the current outbreak created. Online learning is emerging as something innovative and has increased exponentially after the Covid-19 outbreak in the Greek universities. During this tough time, the concern is how academic institutions will be able to adopt online learning in such a massive manner (Carey, 2020). Education today must provide opportunities for a variety of socio-economic, national, and diverse social groups. Due to the modern requirements of a changing student population, with a variety of different demographics and increased operating costs, educational organizations are driven to find ways to become more productive in the methods of delivering their courses and educational services (Baker & Gloucester, 1994; Barnard, 1997). Technological developments look to distance education to reduce the cost of building new facilities, while still serving a changing student population (Bothun, 1997). Finally, e-learning has some positive effects on students, it is a crucial platform for extra ordinary circumstances, or even for people who are unable to complete their studies in person (Eltayeb et al., 2020). 3.3 Educational Needs Exploring and identifying the needs of students and parents is crucial for the development and improvement of the strategic planning of an educational organization. For that reason, in recent decades there has been a systematic effort to categorize them, with the resulting educational needs of students being divided into 6 types (Burton & Merrill, 1991; Alivizos, Apostolos, & Paraschou, 2015):  Normative Needs, the difference between a person’s performance (or a team’s), against a given performance standard.  Felt Needs, an individual or a group desire for improvement.  Expressed Needs, that arise from the actions of individuals and are identified in practice.  Comparative Needs, the differences that exist between a group of people with certain characteristics and another group of people with similar characteristics. www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe Global Research in Higher Education Vol. 4, No. 2, 2021 73 Published by SCHOLINK INC.  Anticipated/Future Needs, a mismatch between the current situation and the expected future situation.  Critical-Incident Needs, that may occur infrequently but can have a significant impact on the operation of a system. 3.4 The Main Problems of E-Learning and Solutions The main problems impeding the effectiveness of online instructions are:  The content of some educational material is not suitable for students whose learning ability is weak.  Sometimes online courses are hindered by poor network connection and poor lesson planning/student attentiveness.  Insufficient teaching resources for online courses.  Insufficient (financial) support for teachers’ teaching space, environment, and equipment.  Lack of teachers’ enthusiasm in teaching.  It is relatively difficult for teachers to engage students’ attention, maintain classroom order and organize classroom discussions, the way they would in face-to-face learning.  Difficulties in addressing different learning styles.  Isolation (Sanad & El-Sayyed, 2020). The solution to those problems is building strong self-motivation skills concerning the online learning environment. Additionally, face-to-face communication with the tutors can be substituted with online communication, and online interactive activities between students should be promoted, similarly to the way they would be in traditional schools or in university classrooms. Also, solving an e-learning problem with a non-e-learning solution (e.g., taking course materials home to have the student’s husband read them aloud or writing an exam at a different time from the rest of the class) is an alternate format (Fichten et al., 2009). Both the sentence and the examples in this last period are not adequately explained, further elaboration is needed for them to make sense). 4. Research The purpose of this quantitative research was to investigate how the Covid-19 pandemic influenced parents’ and students’ preferences over e-learning or face-to-face learning. Self-completion questionnaires were distributed online, to achieve receiving answers from all over Greece in a short period of time. The population was approximately 7,000,000, i.e., Greek nationals, aged 18 to 65. The survey was conducted between 7 July and 20 October 2020. Snowball sampling was used and applied when it is difficult to access subjects with the target characteristics. In this method, the existing study subjects recruit future subjects among their acquaintances and sampling continues until data saturation (Naderifar, 2017). The 170 questionnaire responses comprised: 56 males (33%), 114 females (67%). The absolute (relative) frequencies of the occupation of the respondents are: 7% civil servants, 4% graduates, 5% secondary school students, 10% high school students, 10% parents, 12% postgraduate www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe Global Research in Higher Education Vol. 4, No. 2, 2021 74 Published by SCHOLINK INC. students, 8% private sector employees, 11% teachers and 35% undergraduate university students. As for the educational level of the participants, 48% have a bachelor’s degree, 7% are secondary school graduates, 21% are high school graduates, 23% have a master’s degree and 1% are PhD holders. 4.1 Results and Discussion 4.1.1 Descriptive Statistics Descriptive statistics summarize various aspects about our data, giving details about the sample and providing information about the population from which the sample was drawn. Each variable’s type determines the nature of descriptive statistics that one calculates (Larson, 2006). An important question of the survey (“Have you participated in distance learning before the Covid-19 lockdown?”) focused on the information that shows that in Greece, e-Learning appeared not to have been very popular before the Covid-19 lockdown. 46 % did participate in e-learning courses before the Covid-19 lockdown while 54 % did not. This comes in accordance with Edelhauser et al. (2020) that the e-Learning concept appeared to be considered relevant only after the beginning of the coronavirus pandemic. One other relevant question shows that students (68 % of our sample, Table 1) have quickly migrated to online courses after the Covid-19 lockdown as well as in Edelhauser et al. (2020) and Kamal et al. (2020). Table 1. Participation in E-learning due to Access Issues to Face-to-Face Learning Frequency Proportion Yes 103 60.9 % No 66 39.1 % Several questions were asked to trace out the learning status during lockdown that includes modes of learning, number of students participating in an e-learning course and average time in hours per day that an online course last. Table 2. Questions to Trace Out the Learning Status Variables Frequency (n) Percentage (%) Mode of learning Face-to-face learning 58 34.1 E-learning 27 15.9 A combination of the above 85 50 Replacement of face-to-face learning vs e-learning Yes 124 72.9 www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe Global Research in Higher Education Vol. 4, No. 2, 2021 75 Published by SCHOLINK INC. No 46 27.1 Average time (in hours) per day of online courses 0-1 31 19.7 2-15 122 77.7 15 and above 4 2.6 Satisfaction with the internet services connection Not at all satisfied 9 5.8 Slightly satisfied 19 12.2 Moderately satisfied 48 30.8 Very satisfied 58 37.2 Extremely satisfied 22 14.1 Table 3. Attendance in Distance Learning Courses Per Day Hours per day M SD Occupation Secondaryschool student 12,86 16,96 High school student 2,86 3,90 Graduate 3,33 1,75 Undergraduate student 4,46 3,41 Postgraduate student 2,61 1,79 Parent 2,35 1,66 Teacher 4,06 1,98 Civil servant 3,67 2,99 Private sector employee 1,90 1,60 The respondents prefer face-to-face learning 34.1%, while 15.9% prefer e-learning. Also, 50% respondents prefer a combination of face-to-face learning and e-learning. This conclusion comes in agreement with Kapasia et al. (2020) where 37.9% respondents were continuing their study through textbook reading and digital e-learning, while 30.6% students opted for self-studying through reading textbooks not participated in e-learning. Additionally, in the study of Abbasi et al. (2020) it was found that e-learning is perceived to have little impact compared to face-to-face learning as indicated by 86% of the participants. Furthermore, 72.9% participants reported that they believe in a potential replacement of face-to-face learning from e-learning, while 27.1% participants do not believe in such a possibility. www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe Global Research in Higher Education Vol. 4, No. 2, 2021 76 Published by SCHOLINK INC. Singh and Min (2017) did a study on the effectiveness of conducting digital lectures on gross anatomy. The study investigated students’ satisfaction level towards e-learning, and it was found that most of the students characterized digital learning as efficient. In our study, 40.6 % participants believe that e-learning is moderately effective compared to face-to-face learning, 24.7% slightly effective, 17.1% not at all effective, 14.1% very effective and 3.5% extremely effective. In Ana et al. (2020), 51% of the students expressed agreement related to e-learning preparation and 68% expressed their neutrality about the implementation of e-learning. Adnan and Anwar (2020) found that most of the students 71.4% voted against the notion that online learning is more motivating than face-to-face learning, which agrees (is in line) with our statement. Finally, investigated which educational institution offered the e-learning courses.52.1% of the respondents attended e-learning courses from university, 21.8% from tutorial schools, 19.4% from public schools, 16.4% from private lessons and 10.9% from e-learning services providers. In reference to the duration of lessons, 10.7% respondents maintain/contend that an online lesson should last 30 minutes while 34.5% believe that it should last 45 minutes. Also, 32.7%, 17.3%, 4.8% respondents believe that an online lesson should have a duration of 60, 90 and 120 minutes, respectively. 4.1.2 Inferential Statistics The Chi-square statistic is a non-parametric (distribution free) tool designed to analyze group differences when the dependent variable is measured at a nominal level. Like all non-parametric statistics, the Chi-square is robust with respect to the distribution of the data (McHugh, 2013). Fisher’s exact test is a statistical test used to determine if there are nonrandom associations between two categorical variables. A Fisher’s test was used, to examine if participation in e-learning courses before the Covid-19 lockdown differs between participants of different occupation. There was a statistically significant difference (p<0.001) between different occupations. Particularly, postgraduate students, teachers, and employees (civil servants and private sector employees) had participated more in e-learning courses before the Covid-19 lockdown (Table 3). Table 3. Participation in E-learning Courses before the COVID-19 Lockdown Per Occupation Occupation Participation in e-learning courses before the COVID-19 lockdown Yes No Secondary school student 4 (3%) 3 (1.8%) High school student 6 (3.6%) 11 (6.5%) Graduate 4 (2.4%) 2 (1.2%) Undergraduate student 13 (7.7%) 46 (27.2%) Postgraduate student 17 (10.1%) 3 (1.8%) www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe Global Research in Higher Education Vol. 4, No. 2, 2021 77 Published by SCHOLINK INC. Parent 5 (3%) 11 (6.5%) Teacher 13 (7.7%) 5 (3%) Civil Servant 9 (5.3%) 3 (1.8%) Private sector employee 7 (4.1%) 6 (3.6%) A Fisher’s test was calculated comparing the willingness of investing time and financial resources in e-learning and the age group. A significant interaction was found (p=0.045). Respondents aged 18-30 are more likely to invest in e-learning while respondents aged 45-60 are not open to a distance learning module (Table 4). Table 4. Willingness of Investing Time and Financial Resources in E-learning Willingness to invest time and financial resources in e - learning Yes No Age Under 18 years 13 (7.7%) 10 (5.9%) 18-30 46 (27.2%) 36 (21.3%) 30-45 28 (16.6%) 11 (6.5%) 45-60 8 (4.7%) 16 (9.5%) Up to 60 years 1 (0.6%) 0 (0%) A chi square test was calculated to test the relationship between the kind of course implementation that respondents prefer and the participation in e-learning courses before the Covid-19 lockdown. There was a statistically significant difference (χ 2 (2)=7.492, p=0.024). Supporters of face-to-face learning had not participated in e-learning courses before the Covid-19 lockdown while the exact opposite applies to those of e-learning. Respondents who prefer a combination between the two kinds, have not participated in e-learning courses before the lockdown. The Kruskal-Wallis test (Kruskal & Wallis, 1952) is the nonparametric equivalent of a one-way ANOVA and is used for testing whether samples originate from the same distribution and test the relationship between a nominal independent variable and an ordinal (or numeric) dependent variable with more than three groups. A Kruskal Wallis test was used to test if the number of financial resources that the respondents are willing to invest per month in e-learning differs depending on which e-learning module they prefer. Statistical significance exists (χ 2 (2)=14.457, p=0.001), with a mean rank of 62.67 for the respondents who prefer face-to-face learning, 103.26, for the respondents who prefer e-learning and 73.42 for the respondents who prefer a combination of e-learning and face-to-face learning. www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe Global Research in Higher Education Vol. 4, No. 2, 2021 78 Published by SCHOLINK INC. The Mann-Whitney U test is a statistical test that compares two independent groups that do not require large normally distributed samples (Nachar, 2008). Mann Whitney U test was used to assess if there was a statistically significant difference in the effectiveness of distance education compared to face-to-face learning, depending on the perception that due to the Covid-19 outbreak e-learning will gradually replace face-to-face learning. Statistical significance exists (U=2264, p=0.031). There is a mean rank score of 90 for the respondents who believe in this transition and a mean rank score of 72.73 for those who do not. Conclude that respondents who believe in the replacement of face-to-learning from e-learning believe also that distance education is very effective. The one-sample Wilcoxon signed rank test was originally designed to test for a specified median, under the assumption that the distribution is symmetric, but it can also serve as a test for symmetry if the median is known (O-Thas et al., 2005). One-sample Wilcoxon non-parametric statistical test was used to test if:  the median amount of money that the respondents are willing to invest per month is 55 euros. The test indicated that the median was not significantly different from 55euros (Z=-0.225, p=0.823)  the daily median duration of a learning course is 3 hours. The test indicated that the median daily time was not significantly different from 3 hours (Z=1.541, p=0.123). 5. Conclusions Covid-19 outbreak has brought on challenges for all educational institutions and especially in higher education. Certainly, like many other aspects of everyday life, Covid-19 has had a serious impact on students, teachers, and educational organizations around the globe (Mailizar, Almanthari, Maulina, & Bruce, 2020). As a result, a transition from face-to-face learning to e-learning has occurred. E-learning accommodates everyone’s needs, can be used several times, it is a form of quick delivery of lessons, and it has reduced cost. Due to the wide set of benefits it gives to students, e-learning has become quite popular a solution in the Covid-19 period among students all over the world. In our quantitative research, a sample of 170 from all Greek territory was used. Many respondents have been diverted to e-learning from the conventional learning and most of them had participated in distance learning before the Covid-19 period. However, a combination of the two modes of learning is widely preferred by the sample. Concerning the effectiveness of e-learning, it is considered moderately effective besides traditional face-to-face learning. Additionally, undergraduate students, postgraduate students, teachers, and employees (civil servants and private sector employees) prefer a combination of e-learning and face-to-face learning while school students and parents prefer mainly face-to-face learning and respondents aged 18-30 are more likely to invest in e-learning while respondents aged 45-60 are not open to a distance learning module. Also, followers of face-to-face learning had not participated in e-learning courses before the Covid-19 lockdown while the exact opposite appears to be the case with the followers of e-learning. About the investment of time and financial resources in distance education, mainly PhD holders and undergraduate or postgraduate students are ardent www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe Global Research in Higher Education Vol. 4, No. 2, 2021 79 Published by SCHOLINK INC. supporters. Finally, respondents who believe in the replacement/substitution of face-to-learning from e-learning believe also that distance education is very effective. Finally, the short period of time available for investigation, was one of the major limitations of this research study. Future research should either extend the sample size to a larger time or focus on the preferences of the educational community in the after Covid-19 period. A study on the appropriate number of financial resources needed to be invested in e-learning is recommended. References Abbasi, S., Ayoob, T., Malik, A., & Memon, S. I. (2020). Perceptions of students regarding E-learning during Covid-19 at a private medical college. Pakistan journal of medical sciences, 36(COVID19-S4), S57-S61. https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.36.COVID19-S4.2766 Adams, D., Sumintono, B., Mohamed, A., & Noor, N. S. M. (2018). E-learning readiness among students of diverse backgrounds in a leading Malaysian higher education institution. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 15(2), 227-256. https://doi.org/10.32890/mjli2018.15.2.9 Adnan, M., & Anwar, K. (2020). Online Learning amid the COVID-19 Pandemic: Students’ Perspectives. Online Submission, 2(1), 45-51. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPSP.2020261309 Alivizos, S., Apostolos, K., & Paraschou, V. (2015). Online Distance Learning: From Theory to Practice (E-book). Athens: Association of Greek Academic Libraries. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2IarkuE Ana, A., Minghat, A. D., Purnawarman, P., Saripudin, S., Muktiarni, M., Dwiyanti, V., & Mustakim, S. S. (2020). Students’ Perceptions of the Twists and Turns of E-learning in the Midst of the Covid 19 Outbreak. Romanian Journal for Multidimensional Education/Revista Romane as carpentry Educate Multidimensional, 12. https://doi.org/10.18662/rrem/12.1sup2/242 Bahasoan, A. N., Ayuandiani, W., Mukhram, M., & Rahmat, A. (2020). Effectiveness of online learning in pandemic COVID-19. International Journal of Science, Technology & Management, 1(2), 100-106. https://doi.org/10.46729/ijstm.v1i2.30 Baker, W. J., & Gloster, A. S. (1994). Moving Towards the Virtual University: A Vision of Technology in Higher Education. Cause/Effect, 17(2), 4-11. Baticulon, R. E., Alberto, N. R. I., Baron, M. B. C., Mabulay, R. E. C., Rizada, L. G. T., Sy, J. J., & Reyes, J. C. B. (2020). Barriers to online learning in the time of COVID-19: A national survey of medical students in the Philippines. medRxiv. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.07.16.20155747 Benson, L., Elliot, D., Grant, M., Holschuh, D., Kim, B., Kim, H., et al. (2002). Usability and instructional design heuristics for e-Learning evaluation. In P., & S. (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2002 (pp. 1615-1621). Presented at the World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications (EDMEDIA) Chesapeake, VA: AACE. https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.36.COVID19-S4.2766 https://doi.org/10.32890/mjli2018.15.2.9 https://doi.org/10.33902/JPSP.2020261309 https://doi.org/10.18662/rrem/12.1sup2/242 https://doi.org/10.46729/ijstm.v1i2.30 https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.07.16.20155747 www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe Global Research in Higher Education Vol. 4, No. 2, 2021 80 Published by SCHOLINK INC. Bothun, G. D. (1997). Seven Points to Overcome to Make the Virtual University Viable. Cause/Effect, 1997, 20(2), 55-65. Bower, B. L., & Hardy, K. P. (2004). From correspondence to cyberspace: Changes and challenges in distance education. New directions for community colleges, 2004(128), 5-12. https://doi.org/10.1002/cc.169 Burton, J. K., & Merrill, P. F. (1991). Needs assessment: Goals, needs, and priorities. Instructional design: Principles and applications, 17-43. Carey, K. (2020). Is everybody ready for the big migration to online college? Actually, no. In The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com Chang, C. L., & Ming, F. (2020). E-Learning and Online Instructions of Higher Education during the 2019 Novel Coronavirus Diseases (COVID-19) Epidemic. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1574(1). IOP Publishing, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1574/1/012166 Clark, R. (2002). Six principles of effective e-Learning: What works and why. The e-Learning Developer’s Journal, 1-10. Dhawan, S. (2020). Online learning: A panacea in the time of COVID-19 crisis. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 49(1), 5-22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239520934018 Edelhauser, E., & Lupu, D. L. (2020). Is Romania Prepared for eLearning during the COVID-19 Pandemic? Sustainability, 2020(12), 5438. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12135438 Ellis, R. (2004). Down with boring e-learning! Interview with e-learning guru Dr. Michael W. Allen. Learning circuits. Retrieved from http://www.astd.org/LC/2004/0704_allen.htm Eltayeb, L. B., Alharthi, N. S., Elmosaad, Y. M., & Waggiallah, H. A. (2020). Students’ perception on E. Learning and Remote Exams during COVID 19 Outbreak 2020. International Journal of Pharmaceutical and Phytopharmacological Research (eIJPPR), 10(5), 142-148. Fichten, C., Ferraro, V., Asuncion, J., Chwojka, C., Barile, M., Nguyen, M., Klomp, R., & Wolforth, J. (2009). Disabilities and e-Learning Problems and Solutions: An Exploratory Study. Educational Technology & Society, 12, 241-256. Harris, L. C. (2002). Measuring market orientation: Exploring a market-oriented approach. Journal of market-focused management, 5(3), 239-270. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022994823614 Helfert, G., Ritter, T., & Walter, A. (2002). Redefining market orientation from a relationship perspective: Theoretical considerations and empirical results. European Journal of Marketing, 36(9/10), 1119-1139. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560210437361 Inman, E., Kerwin, M., & Mayes, L. (1999). Instructor and Student Attitudes Toward Distance Learning. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 23(6), 581-591. https://doi.org/10.1080/106689299264594 https://doi.org/10.1002/cc.169 https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1574/1/012166 https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239520934018 https://doi.org/10.3390/su12135438 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022994823614 https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560210437361 https://doi.org/10.1080/106689299264594 www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe Global Research in Higher Education Vol. 4, No. 2, 2021 81 Published by SCHOLINK INC. Kamal, A., Mohd, N., Truna, L., Sabri, M., & Syahrul, N. (2020). Transitioning to Online Learning during COVID-19 Pandemic: Case Study of a Pre-University Centre in Malaysia. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 11. https://doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2020.0110628 Kruskal, W., & Wallis, W. (1952). Use of Ranks in One-Criterion Variance Analysis. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 47(260), 583-621. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1952.10483441 Larson, M. G. (2006). Descriptive Statistics and Graphical Displays, 114(1), 76-81. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.105.584474 Mailizar, A. A., Maulina, S., & Bruce, S. (2020). Secondary school mathematics teachers’ views on e-learning implementation barriers during the Covid-19 pandemic: The case of Indonesia. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 16(7), em1860. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/8240 McHugh, M. L. (2013). The chi-square test of independence. Biochemia medica, 23(2), 143-149. https://doi.org/10.11613/BM.2013.018 Moore, J. L., Dickson-Deane, C., & Galyen, K. (2011). e-Learning, online learning, and distance learning environments: Are they the same? The Internet and Higher Education, 14(2), 129-135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.10.001 Nachar, N. (2008). The Mann-Whitney U: A Test for Assessing Whether Two Independent Samples Come from the Same Distribution. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 4. https://doi.org/10.20982/tqmp.04.1.p013 Naderifar, M., Goli, H., & Ghaljaei, F. (2017). Snowball Sampling: A Purposeful Method of Sampling in Qualitative Research. Strides in Development of Medical Education. (In Press) https://doi.org/10.5812/sdme.67670 Nanigopal, K., Pintu, P., Avijit, R., Jay, S., Ankita, Z., Rahul, M., … Pradip, C. (2020). Impact of lockdown on learning status of undergraduate and postgraduate students during COVID-19 pandemic in West Bengal, India. Children and Youth Services Review, 116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105194 Nichols, M. (2003). A theory of eLearning. Educational Technology & Society, 6(2), 1-10. Omotayo, F. O., & Haliru, A. (2020). Perception of task-technology fit of digital library among undergraduates in selected universities in Nigeria. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 46(1), 102097. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2019.102097 Owusu-Fordjour, C., Koomson, C., & Hanson, D. (2020). The impact of COVID-19 on learning—The perspective of the Ghanaian student. European Journal of Education Studies, 0. Papakonstantinou, G. (2016). Financial burden of admission to higher education. Rana, H., Rajiv, & Lal, M. (2014). E-learning: Issues and Challenges. International Journal of Computer Applications, 97, 20-24. https://doi.org/10.5120/17004-7154 https://doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2020.0110628 https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1952.10483441 https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.105.584474 https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/8240 https://doi.org/10.11613/BM.2013.018 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.10.001 https://doi.org/10.20982/tqmp.04.1.p013 https://doi.org/10.5812/sdme.67670 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105194 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2019.102097 https://doi.org/10.5120/17004-7154 www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe Global Research in Higher Education Vol. 4, No. 2, 2021 82 Published by SCHOLINK INC. Sahu, P. (2020). Closure of universities due to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): Impact on education and mental health of students and academic staff. Cureus, 12(4). https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.7541 Sanad, D., & El-Sayyed, H. A. (2020). Perceptions towards E-learning in Times of COVID-19 Lockdown Phase in the Tertiary Education. Journal of Research in Curriculum Instruction and Educational Technology, 6(4), 77-121. https://doi.org/10.21608/jrciet.2020.117118 Shahzad, A., Hassan, R., Aremu, A. Y., Hussain, A., & Lodhi, R. N. (2020). Effects of COVID-19 in E-learning on higher education institution students: The group comparison between male and female. Quality & Quantity, 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-020-01028-z Singh, A., & Min, A. K. K. (2017). Digital lectures for learning gross anatomy: a study of their efficacy. Korean journal of medical education, 29(1), 27. https://doi.org/10.3946/kjme.2017.50 Thas, O., Rayner, J. C. W., & Best, D. J. (2005). Tests for Symmetry Based on the One-Sample Wilcoxon Signed Rank Statistic. Communications in Statistics-Simulation and Computation, 34(4), 957-973. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610910500308354 https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.7541 https://doi.org/10.21608/jrciet.2020.117118 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-020-01028-z https://doi.org/10.3946/kjme.2017.50 https://doi.org/10.1080/03610910500308354