CRITIQUE PAPER

ARIANNE A. PICAÑA

Paper submitted to:

MARK VAN P. MACAWILE
Professor
Philo-Social Foundations of Education

I. Introduction

The paper that I critiqued is titled “Remote learning during COVID-19:

Lessons from today, Principles for Tomorrow.” This work was produced by the

World Bank staff and other external contributors. This paper was mainly authored by

Alberto Muñoz-Najar, Alison Gilberto, Amer Hasan, Cristóbal Cobo, João Pedro

Azevedo, and Maryam Akmal who are all associated with the World Bank Group.

The study features the drastic effects and the lessons drawn from school

closures during the COVID-19 pandemic which resulted to an astonishing global

delivery experiment of distance education. This paper is a component of a larger World

Bank initiative to offer direction and technical support to maximize country

effectiveness in the development and implementation of remote learning techniques.

The authors posited that the preliminary data on the efficacy of remote learning

during COVID-19 are, at best, conflicting. Compared to previous in-person instruction,

learning outcomes with remote learning have typically been worse due to the

pandemic. In order for remote learning to be successful, the authors consolidated

three complementary salient components: effective teachers, suitable technology, and

engaged learners. This paper examined the critical roles of these components in

combating the hurdles of remote learning. Moreover, one prominent factor that was

highlighted was the role of socio-economic capabilities of countries and its

government’s responsiveness which mainly played as the ultimate indicator in the

success of the implementation of distance education. In terms of the scale and scope

of their remote learning measures, poorer countries lag far behind richer ones. As a

result, the effects in developing countries are likely to reveal an even bleaker picture

of learning poverty.

As it pursued to assess what lessons can be drawn from the experiences of

remote learning during COVID-19 in K-12 education, the authors gathered data from

low, middle to high income countries which panoramically showed distinctive results.

However, some contextual issues were overlooked, most notably the assessment of

learning and obtaining academic marks, which will be the primary focus of my analysis.

II. Summary

The study is divided into the following parts: 1) Introduction; 2) Conceptual

Framework; 3) Discussion on “How Did Countries Respond to Education Disruptions?”

4) Discussion on “What are we learning from country responses?” 5) Discussion on

the “Five Principles for Reimagining Learning Going Forward”; 6) Conclusion

1) Introduction. The authors highlighted the rigorous effects of school

closures at the height of the pandemic addressing three major questions: 1)

was remote learning during COVID-19 taken up and if so, was it effective?

That is, did children learn as much as they did during pre-pandemic, in-

person learning? 2) What lessons can governments derive from this wide-
spread experience? 3) How might policymakers use these lessons to

reimagine learning as schools begin to reopen?

The report used a number of sources, such as qualitative country case

studies early in the pandemic using key informant interviews, a global

survey of countries, to address these questions. Responses collected and

analyzed jointly by the World Bank, UNICEF, UNESCO, and the

Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), as well

as emerging quantitative data from studies conducted during this time, a

global education recovery tracker made possible by a collaboration between

the World Bank, Johns Hopkins University, and UNICEF, and high-

frequency household surveys.

The authors also recognized how school closures exacerbated the

learning crisis and widened its impact. Due to economic instability and

health shocks brought on by COVID-19, many learners have had to leave

school permanently. While schools are shuttered, millions of learners miss

out on their daily school meals. Moreover, learner’s mental health and

motivation to learn are both negatively impacted by school closings. It

revealed that as compared to previous in-person classes, students under

remote learning had poorer levels of emotional, social, and academic

wellbeing. It was found that some learners had signs of depression, which

was an increase from pre-pandemic levels. One of the primary causes of

this was the lack of socio-emotional assistance that schools could provide

to them and the lack of social opportunities resulting to isolation. In addition,

school closures aggravated the circumstances for minority children, children

with disabilities, and other at-risk groups who are disproportionately

 impacted and run the risk of falling further behind. Girls have been spending

more time on home duties than boys have during the epidemic, and school

closures have made them more susceptible to child marriage, gender-based

violence, and early pregnancies. Last but not least, indigenous children are

less likely to enrol than the national average in their countries, they are more

likely to drop out owing to disruptions to the household economy, and

frequently have poorer literacy rates even when they have access to remote

learning because of language barriers.

2) Conceptual Framework. The analytical framework of this report is guided

by three fundamental aspects of remote learning: effective teachers,

suitable technology, and engaged learners. First, a teacher needs to have

an extensive content knowledge and not only the skills to use digital

platforms and resources, but is also capable of adjusting her teaching

practice to ensure student engagement when teaching remotely. On the

hand, a teacher with little or no knowledge at technical skills and struggles

at adapting to the dynamics of remote learning will produce poor results.

Second, the technology used for remote teaching appropriate, from

electronic devices with internet access to paper take-home packets?

Implementing remote learning over the internet in locations with limited

internet penetration will compromise learning due to their inability to access

these learning resources, this run the risk of technology being inappropriate.

Third, student engagement, which is indispensable among the three

components. Students need access to engaging content, as well as regular

feedback and encouragement from teachers, in order to be

engaged. Without engagement the whole purpose of the educational

struggle will be in vain.

The conceptual framework of the authors revolves around these three

identified terminologies: a) left behind – which can happen if instruction

given by a teacher who has little to no expertise or experience in providing

instruction using a remote learning mode. It might also be the case that a

teacher with limited subject-matter expertise is assigned to offer online

remote education in a nation where students have limited access to

technology or connectivity; b) missed opportunities – similarly, can happen

when teachers are ineffective or incompetent, or when technology is

unavailable or improper; c) leaders – leaders who are able to provide remote

learning opportunities that are contextually appropriate, given by a teacher

with strong subject-matter expertise who is skilled or trained in distance

learning.

Furthermore, the authors defined the different types of learning

experiences considered in their report. There are many different modes of

remote learning, and how they are combined matters. First, remote learning,

which is the practice of receiving synchronous or asynchronous teaching

outside of the traditional classroom setting. Second, in-person learning

which is defined as real-time education at a school with direct interaction

between teachers and students. Third, hybrid learning, which is a

combination of in-person and online learning. It is also known as blended

learning at times. Fourth, multimodal approaches, when educational

systems employ a variety of learning delivery methods. Fifth, synchronous

approaches, while lessons and instructional information are being provided,

 these remote learning strategies enable real-time interactions between

students and teachers. Lastly, asynchronous approaches, these methods

of remote learning enable teacher and student engagement before or after

the actual teaching of lessons and instructional material.

3) Discussion on “How Did Countries Respond to Education

Disruptions?” In several cases, governments supplied services in

conjunction with the private sector, direct financial assistance .The decrease

in school days required a number of nations to change their curricula.

Various sorts of help, including remote teacher training were provided to

teachers in some nations. At the same time, some nations have made an

effort to assist underprivileged populations throughout the pandemic by

enhancing remote learning infrastructure, creating learning materials in

minority languages or tailored for children with impairments, and providing

flexible and self-paced platforms. According to the findings of the authors,

the use of remote learning by governments took many different forms.

Multimodal answers were typical, although wealth levels varied between

areas and nations. Some nations used remote learning methodologies using

existing educational technology infrastructure, ranging from paper-based

take-home packages to radio, TV, phone, and internet-based options. Some

countries didn't. Whether individual nations opted towards unimodal or

multimodal modes of remote learning. They adopted a variety of tactics,

when it comes to context-relevant features, design, and use. The authors

introduced the “remote learning paradox” where most countries fall victim to

its idea. In other words, far too many countries have opted for a method of

remote learning that was inappropriate for the needs and potential of the
 majority of students. For instance, in certain nations, governments offered

online learning options, but the majority of students were unable to use them

owing to lack of devices or connectivity issues, which led to uneven uptake

and accentuated disparities.

4) Discussion on “What are we learning from country responses?” The

authors unveiled that the use of remote learning is hampered by preexisting

socioeconomic inequality. According to data from household surveys

gathered by the World Bank between April and September 2020, learners

with more educated parents showed a better degree of learning

engagement throughout the pandemic. While learners from homes with

more educated adults have stayed involved in remote learning for more than

80% of the time during school closures, participation is substantially lower

in homes with parents who have less education. These disparities have only

gotten worse as a result of income losses caused by the pandemic.

Depending on the family background, different children may be able to

purchase new technology or pay additional fees for remote learning access.

The authors also asserted that during COVID-19 pandemic, remote learning

resources were frequently generated in the most widely spoken national or

international languages, excluding a little more than 40% of students

globally are unable to obtain education in a language they can comprehend

or speak. In addition to that, majority of parents have not been equally able

to assist their child’s remote learning.

Furthermore, the authors illustrated that the emerging data on use of

remote learning point to significant regional differences. In nations with high

rates of learning poverty, remote learning adoption was lower. Supply and
 demand restrictions have an impact on take-up of remote learning as well.

On the supply side, it's possible that in some circumstances the chosen

remote learning technique won't be able to reach the majority of learners. In

others, the technology might not work as expected, and the erratic access

that results might deter use. Others may not have content options that are

in line with what students would find most useful. On the demand side,

parents who cannot afford internet or mobile subscriptions or gadgets may

left out.

It was also discovered that the availability of reliable phone and internet

signals is also constrained by geography. Similar to this, informational

barriers can also prevent adoption: parents and children who are unaware

of recently developed programs for remote learning may suffer. Even when

a family has access to a device, parental support for remote learning may

differ based on the learner's age, digital literacy, and parent’s availability.

In addition, teachers will need a range of abilities and proficiencies given

the likely variety of remote learning methods. This is due to the diversity of

remote actions teachers may need to take to maximize learning. This is in

addition to the technical proficiency required to use these tools, which is a

crucial condition. Moreover, for remote learning to be successful,

communication with parents and students is essential. In order to ensure

adoption and efficiency of remote learning, parents are crucial allies.

5) Discussion on the “Five Principles for Reimagining Learning Going

Forward”. Drawing on current insights from remote learning during COVID-

19 school closures, the authors proposed five principles for reinventing

learning as nations attempt to rebuild more effective, egalitarian, and

 resilient educational institutions. First is adopt suitable technology, make

sure remote learning serves its intended goal. Countries must take into

account the availability and use of technology when deciding on remote

learning techniques. Additionally, they must make sure that teachers receive

the assistance they need to acquire and use the technical and pedagogical

skills required for the selected kind of remote learning. Second is prioritize

effective teachers, utilize technology to increase teachers' efficacy. The

development of the abilities required to be an effective teacher in a distant

location must be a focus of teacher’s professional development. Third,

remote learning must create worthwhile two-way interactions. Opportunities

must be made possible by utilizing the technology that is most suited to the

local environment. Fourth is to ensure that learners are engaged,

considering the isolation and detachment that resulted from school closures,

it is crucial that parents and teachers must be involved in supporting learners

in their educational opportunities and to guarantee their socio-emotional

wellbeing. Lastly is, rally all actors to cooperate for learning, cooperation

across government departments, partnerships between the public and

private sectors, and even collaboration between groups of teachers and

school principals are critical to the effectiveness of remote learning and

ensuring that the system continues to adapt, learn, and improve in a

constantly evolving remote learning landscape.

6) Conclusion. The authors concluded that despite the problems identified in

their study, a wide range of experiences have been documented,

capabilities have been developed, and new kinds of education delivery have

been implemented on a large scale in just 18 months. This provides a variety

 of opportunities for reinventing how education might be provided and

enhanced in the next years. This is extremely important. In the face of a

persistent pandemic, governments throughout the world are continuing to

enact school closures and intend to offer a variety of remote learning

techniques. Some countries keep schools closed entirely or partially. In

certain other places, schools are occasionally open in some areas for

particular grade levels. As educational systems shift back to more in-person

instruction, remote learning continues to be a crucial tool for preserving

learning continuity. Remote learning has the ability to solve the learning

disparity that has for far too long slowed down worldwide progress on

learning poverty. This imbalance in learning can be addressed when the

three complementing components—effective teachers, suitable technology,

and engaged learners—are well-aligned.

III. Critique Proper

My analysis gives prominence to the radical effects of remote learning

on the educational system. While it is commendable how the authors presented

the substantial results of the revolutionary implementation of distance

education ranging from learning opportunity disparities, unprecedented

pedagogical methods, learning poverty, remote learning paradox to

socioeconomic limitations and incompetence, as a teacher who had been

directly involved in this struggle, I must say that there are still deep-seated

contextual issues which were not prioritized adequately. Thus, the focus of my

analysis will be the reliability and integrity of how learning was assessed during

the pandemic.
 Fisher, M. R., Jr., & Bandy, J. (2019) posited that student assessment

is, arguably, the centerpiece of the teaching and learning process and therefore

the subject of much discussion in the scholarship of teaching and learning. We

will never be able to determine whether our teaching is having an impact unless

we have a way to collect and evaluate evidence of student learning. Teaching,

then, need a method by which we can determine if students are acquiring the

desired knowledge and skills, and consequently, whether our instruction is

successful. In the case of the implementation of remote learning in the

Philippines, it is still vague how learning assessment was executed and how

performances were quantified. A DepEd report on March 2021 presented that

about 99% of students nationwide obtained passing grades in the first quarter

in that particular school year where distance learning became the norm due to

the pandemic. Sen. Sherwin Gatchalian, the head of the Senate's basic

education committee, which is examining the pandemic's effects on the

educational system, questioned the Department of Education for information on

how it was able to collect its statistics. “I don’t even know how to interpret (these

findings) that 99% passed, and almost no one failed even with the challenges

of distance learning. Does this mean the students are absorbing and learning

their lessons?” Gatchalian said. This is undeniably a valid probing.

DepEd initiated the “academic ease” along with the pandemic, these

include measures to lessen the stress and burdens of teachers and students

where few of the measures suggested are the reconsideration of time allotment

for the completion and submission of activities by the learners that will help

protect the mental health of K to 12 learners through scholastic leniency. DepEd

also rejected to adopt the “pass or fail” grading system in line with the academic
ease asserting that remedial classes are the key to combat learning failures

instead of fixed marks.

To all its intents and purposes, the enactment of academic ease is

indeed sympathetic and appropriate, considering the shackling effects of the

pandemic. However, the idea was abused, compromised and was taken for

granted, referencing through my own experience and observations as a DepEd

teacher. The scholastic leniency was applied extensively advising teachers to

give passing grades even to the most unresponsive, uninterested and inactive

learner. Since our school adopted modular learning, students were required to

submit their outputs at the end of each week. Some students return their activity

envelopes incomplete, or worse, totally unopened and untouched. Even with

home visitation measures, only few will truly commit to accomplishing their

academic activities, student engagement was out of reach. Our heads asserted

that 1-2 activities submitted out of 10 could still qualify for a student to pass the

subject since they will be subjected for remediation or enrichment activities

after, if given 75-79 as a final grade. The problem is, the concept of remediation

was never completely put into its full purpose. Reasons ranging from the

absence of commitment from teachers to detached learners and parents. Thus,

with some teachers concerned about allocating 15 days of their vacation to

remedial classes, they opted to give 80 or above grades to avoid these, now

resulting to an extremely vague face of assessment.

Moreover, the authors also did not give complete emphasis on how

remote learning induced academic dishonesty. According to a brief definition,

academic dishonesty is "an act of deception that breaches the ethics of

academic honesty in schools and will undermine the public's confidence in

educational institutions" (Yang et al., 2017, as cited in Cardina et al., 2022, p.

8706). Academic dishonesty, according to Cardina et al., (2022), includes

plagiarism, fabricating information, cheating during exams, and encouraging

similar behavior to help other students. Galang et al., (2021) highlighted

opinions expressed by public school instructors in a modular system, wherein

parental participation made the problem much harder to determine and fix.

Their study also noted that the modules given by the school division offices'

indication of the answer keys added to their difficulties. According to Frigillano's

(2021) explanation of the real actions taken, students intentionally copy the

answers of other students, share their own answers with other students, and

review past tests to cheat on exams. Similar findings were also reported by

Beruin (2022), who also noted that students may look up test answers online.

The study by Frigillano (2021) also shown how cheating in assignments

or projects was largely accomplished by completing individual tasks through

collaboration without teacher's permission. The use of another author's ideas

without the necessary citation and reference without carefully reading an article

was exposed as plagiarism. The findings of Beruin's study from 2022 also

mentioned that students might get some solutions on YouTube to complete

their online tasks. According to Galang et al., (2021), students' handwriting on

the teacher-submitted modules differs from their own, and there is apparent

copying of the answers from the answer keys supplied on the real modules.

Similar findings on parental participation were reported by San Jose (2022),

who also noted that students are more prone to cheat in class when their friends

are engaged. Additionally, according to Magsambol's (2021) investigative

report and Aguilar's (2021) research, students used academic servicing to fulfill

their requirements. Magsambol discovered that other students were supplying

such commissioned work, using social media (namely, Twitter and Facebook)

as their method of payment. This news story was supported by Aguilar's (2021)

findings, which showed that academic service was also provided by teachers

and professors who regarded this circumstance as a chance to make money

while helping suffering students. Current research suggests that procrastination

and laziness are the main internal driving variables. Aguilar (2021) claims that

some students engaged in academic dishonesty because they were too lazy to

complete assignments and were too preoccupied playing with their friends or

on social media to care about learning. Peer participation was the most

common outcome across the available resources when external influencing

variables were taken into account. According to Frigillano (2021), a student is

aware that they are engaging in academic dishonesty when they enable a friend

or friends to duplicate their test answers or accept assistance from them to

complete tasks without the teacher's permission.

Remote learning has aggravated the act of academic dishonesty which

has been prevalent even prior to the pandemic and as a teacher, this

immensely affect how learning should be truly assessed.

These major effects of remote learning on the educational system should

have been given the exact same light as the other issues presented by the

authors, this way, a more precise context in relation to the author’s questions

on what lessons can governments derive from this wide-spread experience and
how might policymakers use these lessons to reimagine learning as schools

begin to reopen could be exhibited.

IV. Conclusion

Conclusively, although I applaud the extensive endeavor of the authors

and the relevance of the study's findings, I believe the authors should have

delved deeper as well into certain crucial aspects with the implementation of

remote learning, namely: a) the process of evaluating students' learning

throughout the pandemic and the validity of that process in light of how

numerical marks were obtained; b) the case of academic dishonesty and how

it affected the assessment of learning during the pandemic.

However, this study uncovered the distinct and pervasive implications of

distance learning. This has unveiled the true panoramic picture of situations

and disparities among countries from the efficacy of teachers, suitability of

technology, interest of learners to government responsiveness and

collaborative efforts of all actors involved. I suppose that these findings will

immensely become lessons that will direct future measures in recalibrating the

educational system.

V. Recommendations

My thorough critique on Remote learning during COVID-19: Lessons

from today, Principles for Tomorrow, revealed some overlooked critical points

on the essence of learning, most notably on the manner of assessment and the

reliability of academic outputs in the absence of in-person education. Such

particular issues needs to be tackled with the same light and emphasis as the
other presented challenges to better address the key questions of the authors.

Thus, these are my recommendations:

1. Include findings on the process of academic assessment during the

implementation remote learning on low, middle to high income

countries to show distinction.

2. Examine further the reliability of student's academic output and

marks obtained during the implementation of remote learning.

3. Explore and examine further levels of academic dishonesty among

countries and how it affected the assessment of learning during the

implementation of remote learning.

VI. References

Aguilar, M. G. (2021). Academic Dishonesty in the Philippines: The Case

of 21st Century Learners and Teachers. International Journal of
Management, Technology, and Social Sciences, 6(1), 306-313.
https://doi.org/10.5281/Zenodo.5091613

Beruin, L. C. (2022). STEM students conceptions of online learning

during COVID-19 pandemic: A phenomenographic study. Journal of
Pedagogical Research, 4. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202217716
deped-probes-academic-dishonesty-in distance-learning/

Fisher, M. R., Jr., & Bandy, J. (2019). Assessing Student Learning.

Vanderbilt University Center for Teaching. Retrieved [todaysdate] from
https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/assessing-student-learning/.
Frigillano, S. D. (2021). Prevalent Academic Cheating Practices Among
Pre-Service Teachers. International Journal of English Language
Studies, 3(7), 5-14. https://doi.org/10.32996/ijels

Galang, A., Conde, R., & Sudarsana, I. (2021). Mga kwento ng guro at
kwentong mag-aaral: student assessment processes, challenges and
solutions In the New Normal

Magsambol, B. (2021a, February 2). In remote learning, some students

pay someone else to do their classwork. Retrieved August 29, 2022,
fromRappler.com:https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/investigative/stu
dents-paying-someone-else-do-classwork-remote-learning-setup/

Magsambol, B. (2021b, March 5). DepEd probes academic dishonesty

in distance learning. Retrieved August 29, 2022, from Rappler.com:
https://www.rappler.com/nation/ Setup Leading To Quality Assurance
Inputs. Jurnal Penjaminan Mutu, 7(2), 171-187.

Yang, S. C., Chiang, F. K., & Huang, C. L. (2017). A comparative study

of academic dishonesty among university students in Mainland China
and Taiwan. Asia Pacific Education Review, 18(3), 385–399.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564- 017-9497-2