Cited by 693Education during COVID-19 pandemicE-Learning and COVID-19Online and Blended Learning

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 66 of the 69 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 55 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Emergency remote teaching and students’ academic performance in higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic: A case study

Open access
Iglesias-Pradas, Santiago, Hernández-García, Ángel, Chaparro-Peláez, Julián, Prieto, José Luis·2021·Computers in Human Behavior

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused a massive disruption in the way traditional higher education institutions deliver their courses. Unlike transitions from face-to-face teaching to blended, online or flipped classroom in the past, changes in emergency remote teaching –a temporary shift of instructional delivery to an alternate remote delivery mode due to crisis circumstances– happen suddenly and in an unplanned way. This study analyzes the move to emergency remote teaching at the School of Telecommunication Engineering (Universidad Politécnica de Madrid), and the impact of organizational aspects related to unplanned change, instruction-related variables –class size, synchronous/asynchronous delivery– and use of digital supporting technologies, on students' academic performance. Using quantitative data of academic records across all (N = 43) courses of a bachelor's degree programme in Telecommunication Engineering and qualitative data from a questionnaire delivered to all (N = 43) course coordinators, the research also compares the academic results of students during the COVID-19 pandemic with those of previous years. The results of this case study show an increase in students' academic performance in emergency remote teaching, and support the idea that organizational factors may contribute to successful implementation of emergency remote teaching; the analysis does not find differences across courses with different class sizes or delivery modes. The study further explores possible explanations for the results of the analysis, considering organizational, individual and instruction-related aspects.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.chb.2021.106713

Cites

66 of 66 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

0 of 55 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

Show all 59 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 36
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 44
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 4
69 of 69
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Before COVID-19, research on how to make sudden transitions rapidly and on the potential effects of instructors' decisions about instructional methods or supporting technologies was uncharted.

    “However, research on how to make these sudden transitions rapidly, and the potential effects of the decisions taken by institutions and instructors regarding the use of different instructional methods or supporting technologies, means (or at least meant before COVID-19) venturing into uncharted territory.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Instructors' adaptation decisions depend on their familiarity with online learning and supporting technologies and on how compatible the new situation is with their prior instructional methods.

    “These decisions depend on the familiarity of instructors with online learning and supporting technologies, as well as the compatibility of the new situation with the instructional methods that they have been using over the years.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Students in this degree have the necessary digital skills and resources to succeed in an online course.

    “However, in our case, that assumption seems reasonable because (1) young people with the highest levels of digital competence tend to be on courses involving ICT and are more favorable predisposed to use digital tools (Sánchez-Caballé, Gisbert-Cervera, & Esteve-Mon, 2021); and (2) most, if not all students are proficient in the use of digital technologies and have their own devices”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    First-semester courses in the same years provide a valid comparison to second-semester courses for isolating the effect of emergency remote teaching.

    “To discard potential confounding effects, we also explored the differences across first semester courses in the past three years, all of which were delivered as face-to-face courses.”
4 of 4

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Semester duration before suspension is understated

    Minor

    The suspension began March 11, six weeks after the stated start week of January 29, not barely four weeks into the semester.

  • Research question calls bachelor's courses graduate courses

    Minor

    RQ1 identifies the courses as graduate courses, while the study repeatedly identifies the programme and its courses as bachelor's degree courses.

  • Conclusion overlooks a significant Webex result

    Minor

    The analysis reports a significant difference for courses using Webex, but the conclusion says no significant differences were found between digital tools. The conclusion does not preserve the stated exception.

3 of 3

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 69 references

3 of the 69 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Benton, 2015, Vol. 18
  2. Brierton, 2016, A comparison of higher order thinking skills demonstrated in synchronous and asynchronous online college discussion posts, North American Colleges and Teachers of Agriculture, 60, 14
  3. Dill, 2020, As coronavirus spreads, the decision to move classes online is the first step. What comes next?, The Chronicle of Higher Education, 66
  4. Moallem, 2015, The impact of synchronous and asynchronous communication tools on learner self-regulation, social presence, immediacy, intimacy and satisfaction in collaborative online learning, The Online Journal of Distance Education and E-Learning, 3, 53

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–300 of 689

Metadata

Authors
Iglesias-Pradas, S., Hernández-García, Á., Chaparro-Peláez, J., & Prieto, J. L.
Affiliations
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (ES)
Corresponding author
Hernández-García, Ángel
Venue
Computers in Human Behavior
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-06
Volume
119
Pages
106713
ISSN
0747-5632 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3127071514
Cited by
693
References
69
Citations by year
2026: 45 · 2025: 49 · 2024: 110 · 2023: 202 · 2022: 208 · 2021: 79
FWCI
264.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Computers in Human Behavior (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Hispana (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Archivo Digital UPM (Universidad Politécnica de Madrid) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Education during COVID-19 pandemic
  • Social Sciences › Education › E-Learning and COVID-19
  • Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
Keywords
emergency remote teaching, COVID-19 pandemic, academic performance, higher education, class size, digital learning technologies, telecommunications education, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-06, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-06 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review