Heliyon 10 (2024) e25766

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Heliyon
journal homepage: www.cell.com/heliyon

Research article

Jordanian English language educators’ perceived readiness for

virtual learning environment
Hanan Madanat a, Radzuwan Ab Rashid b, c, *, Umair Munir Hashmi b,
Marwan Harb Alqaryouti d, Misrah Mohamed e, Omar Ali Al Smadi f
a
Department of English Language and Literature, American University of Madaba, Madaba, Jordan
b
Faculty of Languages and Communication, Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin, Terengganu, Malaysia
c
Applied Science Research Centre, Applied Science Private University, Amman, Jordan
d
Department of English Language, Literature & Translation, Zarqa University, Zarqa, Jordan
e
Academic Enhancement and Professional Development, Office for Teaching and Learning, Coventry University, United Kingdom
f
School of Distance Education, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Online engagement has assumed a pivotal role within educational pedagogy, particularly during
English language educator the COVID-19 pandemic. This study delves into the perceptions of Jordanian English language
Jordan educators regarding their preparedness for online teaching in the post-pandemic landscape. In
Online teaching
this quantitative study, a group of 101 English language educators from Jordanian universities
Readiness
participated, and their responses were subjected to analysis through descriptive statistics. The
Virtual learning
findings of this analysis indicate that the respondents exhibited a moderate level of familiarity
with technology and e-learning platforms, alongside a similarly moderate level of competence in
managing their online courses. Furthermore, the study underscores a noteworthy gap in their
exposure to online education, despite their considerable tenure in teaching English. Conse­
quently, the study underscores the necessity for tailored training programs designed to compre­
hensively enhance the online teaching proficiency of English language educators, thereby
facilitating a more effective virtual learning environment.

1. Introduction

Educators are perpetually tasked with the imperative of evolving their pedagogical approaches [1]. This demand became partic­
ularly pronounced during the exigent circumstances precipitated by the COVID-19 pandemic, compelling instructors to swiftly pivot
towards virtual and online teaching modalities to facilitate education beyond the confines of traditional classrooms [1]. Within this
context, the readiness of educators to effectively engage with students through electronic mediums became an exigent necessity [2].
Much like other nations grappling with the repercussions of COVID-19, Jordan experienced a seismic shift in its educational
landscape, necessitated by stringent mobility restrictions. Consequently, students and educators throughout the country abruptly
transitioned from in-person, face-to-face learning environments to virtual, screen-mediated educational settings, presenting numerous
challenges for both instructors and learners.
In the midst of this transformation, educators encountered formidable obstacles, encompassing technological hurdles and the need

* Corresponding author. Faculty of Languages and Communication, Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin, Terengganu, Malaysia.
E-mail address: radzuwanrashid@unisza.edu.my (R. Ab Rashid).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e25766
Received 22 December 2022; Received in revised form 6 December 2023; Accepted 1 February 2024
Available online 6 February 2024
2405-8440/© 2024 Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
H. Madanat et al. Heliyon 10 (2024) e25766

for pedagogical adaptation [3,4]. The intricacies of online course design, virtual discussions, instructional strategies, and feedback
mechanisms diverged significantly from their conventional counterparts, demanding guidance and support from peers and institu­
tional resources [5,6]. Achieving proficiency in offering online courses necessitated comprehensive considerations, encompassing
infrastructure and policy adjustments, as integral strategies to ensure quality and the successful implementation of remote education
[7]. University leaders play a pivotal role in ameliorating the challenges associated with online teaching, and they should formulate a
strategic framework that not only addresses these issues but also enhances instructors’ satisfaction with distance learning, as
emphasized by Ref. [8].
Scholars concur that the persistence of COVID-19 remains foreseeable, with the likelihood of future pandemics on the horizon [9].
Notably, Fernández-Batanero’s [10] research findings reveal that higher education institutions, as surveyed, intend to maintain online
education offerings beyond the pandemic). Nevertheless, it is essential to acknowledge that educators exhibit a heterogeneous
spectrum of experiences and readiness levels pertaining to online teaching [11,12].
The evolution of technology-enhanced language learning mandates faculty members to adopt innovative approaches for preparing,
organizing, delivering, and assessing courses and learning materials within the online teaching domain [13]. Consequently, profes­
sional development emerges as a paramount priority in equipping educators with the requisite knowledge and skills to adapt to the
transformed landscape of learning, where the roles of both learners and teachers have undergone profound shifts. This transformation
in pedagogy has been acknowledged as a cornerstone within the realm of language teaching and the professional development of
language educators [14].
The recognition of educators regarding the significance of their professional development serves as a foundational catalyst for the
enhancement of instructional practices and the cultivation of an enriched virtual learning environment [15]. Within the spectrum of
professional development, educators must cultivate the readiness to establish virtual classrooms, engage students in virtual tasks and
activities, and adeptly facilitate learning through virtual teaching modalities [16].
Extensive research has been conducted on e-readiness, which pertains to preparedness for online teaching, on a global scale (e.g.
[17–21]). However, there remains a notable gap in this research, particularly in the Middle East, and more specifically in Jordan. It’s
noteworthy that the majority of studies on online readiness have primarily focused on students, leaving educators relatively under­
explored in this context.
This research holds significant importance as it sheds light on an under-investigated area. Its findings can play a pivotal role in
identifying and addressing issues confronted by the higher education sector within Jordan. Notably, Jordan faces challenges related to
the availability of essential equipment for distance learning, a concern highlighted in a report by The Jordan Times in 2022 regarding
the Global Knowledge Index (GKI) 2021 [22]. This report ranked the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan 92nd in terms of its information
and communication technology capabilities, underlining the need for educational institutions to acquire essential equipment to
facilitate effective distance learning.
To equip educators with the essential competencies required for effective online teaching and to enhance their preparedness for
potential future crises, it is imperative to undertake a comprehensive assessment of their readiness for online instruction. This eval­
uation will serve as a foundation for the formulation of pertinent recommendations and suggestions aimed at fostering the develop­
ment of their online teaching skills. Within this context, the present study delves into the perceptions of English language educators
regarding their readiness for online teaching, encompassing their proficiency in utilizing online technological tools and their capacity
to administer online courses effectively.
To fulfill this objective, three pivotal research questions were systematically addressed.

1. What is the extent of readiness of English teachers in their aptitude for utilizing online technology?
2. To what degree are English teachers prepared to manage their courses within an online environment effectively?
3. What is the level of readiness demonstrated by English teachers in their utilization of e-learning portals as a pedagogical tool?

2. Literature review

Online teaching has been the subject of research for the past two decades, a period during which technology has firmly entrenched
itself in the realm of education [23]. The recent global shift toward online teaching has underscored the necessity for a thorough
examination and scrutiny of online learning, encompassing an exploration of the requisite skills and infrastructure, as well as an
assessment of educators’ preparedness for this mode of instruction. The extent to which educators appreciate the significance of their
professional development emerges as a pivotal factor that can serve as the linchpin for the enhancement of their instructional practices
and the subsequent improvement of the virtual learning environment.
Scholars have conducted extensive research into the factors influencing e-readiness, drawing attention to critical elements [e.g., 11,
24, 25, 26]. Among these factors, educators’ attitudes toward e-teaching and their technical proficiency emerge as some of the most
salient [25,26]. In a comprehensive meta-analysis of educator e-readiness [25], established that educators who exhibit greater fa­
miliarity with technology, encompassing computers, the internet, and various media tools, tend to be more prepared for the rigors of
teaching in an online environment.
Nenko’s [27] research highlighted that educators’ readiness for distance education is intricately linked to their willingness, level of
preparation regarding fundamental technical communication skills, and their proficiency in adopting new teaching methodologies
tailored for e-learning [27]. This study, conducted in Ukraine, brought to light a concerning statistic, indicating that a substantial 74 %
of educators lacked the necessary theoretical knowledge and practical skills imperative for effective implementation of online
teaching.

2
H. Madanat et al. Heliyon 10 (2024) e25766

Similarly, Elewa’s [8] investigation centered on 203 nursing faculty members hailing from diverse universities in Egypt. This
research revealed that while these faculty members displayed a commendable degree of readiness for online teaching, they uniformly
expressed dissatisfaction with the inadequate technology support and recurrent technology failures experienced [8]. Elewa aptly
concluded that for the distance learning process to thrive, instructors necessitated additional training and access to essential infra­
structure, including laptops and requisite technical support. It was underscored that university administrations must formulate a
strategic plan to augment educator satisfaction with online teaching while addressing the pertinent issues.
Furthermore, Suryanti et al.’s [29] study delved into the preparedness of educators for online learning within the context of
Universitas Muhammadiyah Gresik, Indonesia. They employed a Learning Management System (LMS) to both monitor and evaluate
the completeness of course content, complemented by a survey consisting of 11 items aimed at assessing instructors’ confidence in
their Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (T-PACK) [29]. The research underscored the pivotal role played by the
T-PACK component in determining online teaching readiness. Notably, the study found that just a little over 50 % of the courses within
the university’s learning management system had been adequately developed, and a mere 14 % possessed complete content.
In a study involving 208 participants, Gay [24] made a noteworthy discovery regarding e-readiness. While technical skills represent
a key factor influencing e-readiness, Gay’s research found that this aspect is comparatively less challenging than other measured
factors, including lifestyle and pedagogical readiness. This comprehensive examination encompassed an evaluation of lifestyle
readiness and pedagogical readiness as integral components of e-readiness. The study’s conclusion revealed that many online in­
structors initially deemed not e-ready demonstrated significant proficiency in the technological aspects of the online environment.
However, notable deficiencies emerged in their lifestyle and pedagogical readiness. These shortcomings were indicative of a prefer­
ence for face-to-face interactions, a reliance on immediate feedback characteristic of traditional settings, and a tendency not to pro­
actively complete tasks well in advance of deadlines [24].
Scherer et al. [12] adopted a more encompassing perspective in their examination of teachers’ readiness, considering organiza­
tional readiness, teachers’ individual characteristics, and contextual factors. Their research led to the identification of distinct
teachers’ e-readiness profiles, categorized as low, inconsistent, and high enthusiasm. These profiles were delineated based on factors
such as T-PACK self-efficacy, online presence, and institutional support. Importantly, the study elucidated these profiles in the context
of instructor characteristics and the prevailing contextual factors. The research underscored that educators’ readiness for online
teaching and learning transcends their self-efficacy and teaching presence; it is significantly contingent upon the institutional, cultural,
and innovation context [12]. This finding accentuates the intricate relationship between teachers’ competencies and the institutional
capacity, emphasizing the necessity for a comprehensive approach to e-teaching.
Bolliger and Hallupa [11] corroborate this finding in their research, concluding that instructors who harbor a strong sense of
confidence in their ability to engage in online teaching tend to report higher levels of preparedness compared to those who possess
lower levels of confidence. Given that instructors are more likely to embrace online teaching when they feel adequately prepared, the
imperative of thorough preparation for online education becomes abundantly clear [11].
Nonetheless, it’s important to note that not all research on educators’ e-readiness suggests that educators universally require
assistance. Polat et al. [29] conducted an extensive examination of K-12 teachers’ preparedness for online teaching in Turkey. They
developed a comprehensive assessment comprising 70 items, encompassing 13 distinct constructs, including technical competence,
attitude, course design/pedagogical competence, computer self-efficacy, and management support, which they administered to a
sample of over 2000 teachers. Remarkably, the study revealed that teachers exhibited a significant level of readiness for e-learning.
Moreover, the research uncovered gender-based variations, with males scoring higher in technical competence and females excelling
in pedagogical and ethical competence. Polat et al. aptly concluded that readiness related to technology augments as educators
increasingly utilize digital devices in their educational endeavors, highlighting the adaptability of teachers in embracing online
teaching [29].
Furthermore, studies underscore that the advantages of educators’ e-readiness extend beyond the instructor’s professional com­
petencies, positively influencing learners as well. Zeybek [1] explored the readiness of pre-service teachers for online learning and
their engagement levels within the online learning environment. The study observed that pre-service teachers exhibited high readiness
across all dimensions, spanning technological readiness, self-directed learning, learner control, and communication. Significantly, the
research findings unveiled a positive and substantial correlation between the dimensions of enthusiasm for online learning and all
facets of online learner engagement. This phenomenon can be attributed to the notion that a genuine desire to learn fosters motivation
and facilitates independent learning, thereby amplifying learner engagement and fostering educational continuity [1].
Sarfraz et al. [30] conducted a study exploring the moderating influence of teachers’ readiness for online teaching on medical
students’ perceptions of online learning and their subsequent learning outcomes. The findings illuminated that when teachers
exhibited high levels of readiness, it exerted a positive impact on students’ perceptions of online learning, ultimately translating into
improved learning outcomes.
In a distinct context, Goutam et al. [31] conducted an in-depth investigation into the response, readiness, and challenges associated
with online education in Bangladesh. The study employed qualitative methods such as focus group discussions and in-depth interviews
with purposively selected students and teachers engaged in online education across two public and three private universities. The
research outcomes delineated varying responses from different universities during the pandemic, with some promptly adapting to the
situation, while others were slow to react or remained inactive. Given the need for teachers, students, and university administrations to
prepare for this new educational paradigm, a spectrum of initiatives emerged, though not without challenges. Noteworthy challenges
encompassed the scarcity of appropriate technology, limited technological proficiency among teachers, challenges in motivating
students, inadequate Internet facilities, high Internet costs, and the absence of conducive learning environments in students’ homes.
The study proposed several recommendations, including teacher development workshops, technology and facility enhancements,

3
H. Madanat et al. Heliyon 10 (2024) e25766

subsidies for Internet usage, revisions to higher education and emergency education laws, and collaboration with other professionals
and institutions.
Gabriella et al. [32] conducted a thematic analysis of literature spanning from March 2020 to November 2020, focusing on the
transformative impact of the COVID-19 crisis on teaching methods. The study highlighted that this crisis necessitated faculty members
to overcome their bias against online instruction and prompted them to reimagine their teaching approaches. As a result, increased
innovation and unforeseen positive experiences emerged and continued to evolve. The research concluded that educators who were
already engaged in student-centered approaches, relational pedagogies, reflective practice, community networks, and digital tech­
nologies were better equipped to navigate the transition to online teaching and learning effectively. Consequently, future teacher
training should emphasize effective online education, curriculum design and delivery, collaborative skills, the establishment of
relational connections with students, and improved access to educational resources [32].

2.1. Theoretical framework

The concept of learning is delineated as the acquisition of knowledge and the subsequent application of that knowledge to address
future challenges and opportunities. Two fundamental learning domains, knowledge acquisition and practical application, have been
subjects of investigation since the 1950s, as evident in the seminal work of Bloom [33].

2.1.1. Knowledge
Teachers’ knowledge is a multifaceted construct, with a crucial distinction being made between content knowledge exclusive to
teaching, which is widely recognized as an integral component of effective education. Notably, the landscape of teaching encompasses
both physical and online modalities, and these two domains differ significantly in terms of delivery methods and evaluation meth­
odologies [24].
In the realm of online teaching, educators are compelled to harness technology to facilitate and augment students’ learning ex­
periences. This entails the acquisition of content knowledge tailored to the subject matter they teach, coupled with techniques for
proficiently managing online sessions and the pertinent technologies employed in the virtual classroom.
Teacher content knowledge pertains to their mastery of the subject matter they teach, encompassing a profound understanding of
the underlying concepts, theories, and cognitive frameworks within the subject area. Moreover, it encompasses the ability to effec­
tively convey this content to students, facilitating comprehension and skill development. A teacher with robust content knowledge can
skillfully analyze, synthesize, and communicate information, establish meaningful connections between disparate pieces of knowl­
edge, and employ this expertise to foster student learning. Such educators are well-equipped to address student queries, offer sub­
stantive feedback, and craft engaging lessons that stimulate student interest and comprehension in the subject matter.
Conversely, teacher know-how comprises the skill set required to effectively engage students in the learning process. In the context
of online teaching, teacher know-how assumes a distinct significance, encompassing the proficiencies necessary for effective virtual
instruction. Proficient online educators adeptly incorporate multimedia elements such as videos, images, and animations, and leverage
virtual tools and resources such as virtual whiteboards, online simulations, and discussion forums to create dynamic and interactive
lessons. Furthermore, they possess a deep understanding of how to facilitate online discussions, manage online classroom dynamics,
motivate students, leverage technology for enhanced learning support, and proficiently assess student progress in the virtual learning
environment. This assessment is conducted through various tools such as online quizzes, discussion forums, and virtual assignments.
Teachers’ knowledge encompasses both content expertise and pedagogical know-how, and in the context of online teaching, the
latter entails a comprehensive skill set geared towards effective virtual instruction [24].

2.1.2. Practice
Educators play a pivotal role in shaping the resources and instructional dynamics of their teaching, influencing both the content
they convey and the timing of its delivery [34]. In the realm of online teaching, educators bear the responsibility of crafting
comprehensive course structures, ensuring alignment between learning objectives, activities, assignments, and assessment strategies.
Moreover, they must judiciously select technological resources and effectively manage virtual interactions to harmonize with the
overarching learning outcomes and objectives within their online courses.
The effectiveness of teachers’ practices has been empirically linked to their possession of adequate knowledge and proficiency in
various domains, encompassing subject matter expertise, technological acumen, pedagogical strategies, and assessment methodologies

Fig. 1. Theoretical framework to examine Jordanian English language educators’ perceived readiness for online teaching.

4
H. Madanat et al. Heliyon 10 (2024) e25766

[26]. Teachers endowed with insufficient knowledge, subpar instructional practices, and unfavorable attitudes tend to encounter
greater challenges, particularly within the context of online teaching.
Furthermore, educators equipped with robust professional knowledge and the opportunity to translate this knowledge into practice
are more likely to harbor a heightened perception of readiness to engage in effective teaching endeavors. The interrelationship be­
tween Knowledge, Practice, and Readiness is illustrated in the accompanying Fig. 1.
The discussion on Teachers’ Knowledge and Practice, as presented in section 2.1.1 and 2.1.2, aligns closely with the foundational
concepts of the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework. TPACK, introduced by Koehler and Mishra [35],
provides a comprehensive model for understanding the complex interplay between technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge in
education. As such, it offers valuable insights into the multifaceted nature of educators’ knowledge and practices, particularly in the
context of online teaching.
In the context of TPACK, educators’ knowledge encompasses three primary domains: Technological Knowledge (TK), Pedagogical
Knowledge (PK), and Content Knowledge (CK). Teacher content knowledge (CK) underscores the importance of educators’ mastery of
the subject matter they teach. This domain is integral to the TPACK framework, as CK represents the foundation upon which effective
teaching is built. Educators must possess a deep understanding of their subject matter to facilitate meaningful learning experiences
[35].
The framework recognizes the significance of Technological Pedagogical Knowledge (TPK), which entails the seamless integration
of technology and pedagogy. Proficient online educators exhibit the type of TPK emphasized in the TPACK framework. They skillfully
leverage technology to enhance pedagogical practices, fostering interactive and engaging learning experiences [35].

3. Methodology

3.1. Research design

In this quantitative research endeavor, the researchers opted for an online survey methodology. This method falls under the
broader categories of computer-administered surveys, electronic mail surveys, and web surveys, as delineated by Nayak and Narayan
[36]. Given the unparalleled global circumstances that emerged in the wake of the pandemic, the choice was made to employ a web
survey. This decision was underpinned by the advantages it offers, notably its accessibility to a wide array of individuals regardless of
geographical location. This accessibility facilitated the attainment of a diverse and representative sample of participants. Furthermore,
a web survey possesses the distinctive benefit of being accessible through various devices equipped with internet connectivity. This
feature enhances flexibility and convenience for participants, aligning with the evolving needs of the study’s context.

3.2. Participants

Gathering data from the entire population can be an insurmountable challenge, particularly when it’s not feasible to individually
identify or contact each population member, or when dealing with an exceptionally large population. In the present study, the target
population consisted of individuals scattered across various regions of Jordan, rendering it impractical to identify and contact each
one. Consequently, the researchers opted for a cluster sampling approach to collect data, with the aim of obtaining a representative
subset of the target population [37].
To ensure the findings could be extrapolated to the broader population, the researchers applied the sample size calculation method
formulated by Etikan and Babtope [38] before initiating the data collection process. This meticulous approach was instrumental in
enhancing the generalizability of the study’s outcomes beyond the sampled cluster. Below is the formula used:
N∗X
n=
X+N− 1

where X = (Zα/22*P (1-P))/MOE2

n = Sample size; P= Proportion of sample; MOE = Margin of error; N= Population size.
Z-(α/2) = the critical value of the normal distribution at a α/2 (for a confidence interval level of 95 %, α is 0.05, and the critical
value is 1.96). This entails the required level of confidence for the estimation.
The online questionnaire’s access link was disseminated to English language instructors affiliated with English departments at both
private and public universities in Jordan. This distribution was facilitated through diverse electronic channels, encompassing email
communication and social media platforms such as WhatsApp, Facebook, and Telegram. Invitations were extended to all eligible
teaching staff within the English departments who possessed prior experience in online teaching, soliciting their participation as
research subjects. The survey was administered over a span of two months (i.e October and November), aligning with the academic
year 2022–2023. To ensure the anonymity and confidentiality of all responses, no identifying information was collected. Ultimately,
the survey garnered a robust response from a total of 101 Jordanian English language educators.

3.3. Instrument

The research instrument employed in this study was a set of questionnaires adapted from Martin et al. [26]. These questionnaires
were meticulously designed using Google Forms. It comprised two distinct sections: Part A, focused on gauging respondents’

5
H. Madanat et al. Heliyon 10 (2024) e25766

perceptions regarding their readiness for online teaching, and Part B, dedicated to collecting demographic information.
Part A of the questionnaire encompassed three key constructs, each tailored to investigate respondents’ perceptions of their
proficiency in distinct areas. These constructs included the ability to utilize technology tools (comprising 9 items), the competence to
manage their courses online (consisting of 5 items), and the aptitude to effectively administer teaching via e-portals (comprising 10
items). Each of these constructs demonstrated commendable internal consistency, as indicated by Cronbach’s alpha coefficients of
0.86, 0.80, and 0.88, respectively. These coefficients surpassed the recommended minimum threshold of 0.7, as advised by Ponterotto
and Ruckdeschel [39]. Respondents were tasked with rating their perceptions on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (indicating “not
at all familiar”) to 5 (signifying “extremely familiar").

3.3.1. Data analysis

The data collected through the Google Form were exported, meticulously coded, and subjected to analysis utilizing IBM’s Statistical
Package for Social Science (SPSS) version 28. Before commencing the analysis, a thorough review of all responses was conducted, and
data underwent a rigorous cleansing process. Notably, no incomplete responses were identified during this review. The subsequent
analysis entailed providing descriptive statistical insights at the item level, incorporating percentages, means, and standard deviations.
In alignment with established practices observed by other scholars (e.g., [11,40–42]), the range of mean scores, as presented in
Table 1, served as the interpretive framework for discerning the level of readiness exhibited by the English language educators.

3.4. Ethical consideration

The ethical clearance was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the American University of Madaba (ref.no E0046/22). Ethical
considerations were paramount throughout the study’s various stages. Firstly, the study adhered to the principles of informed consent
and confidentiality. All participants were provided with a clear explanation of the research’s purpose and objectives before voluntarily
participating in the online survey. Their involvement was entirely voluntary, and they were assured of the confidentiality and ano­
nymity of their responses. No personally identifiable information was collected, and the data were used solely for research purposes.
Secondly, the research strived to ensure fairness and equity in participant recruitment. The survey was disseminated widely to
English language instructors across both private and public universities in Jordan, encompassing diverse geographic regions. This
approach aimed to create a representative sample of participants and avoid any potential biases arising from selective recruitment.
Lastly, the research methodology adhered to established ethical standards and guidelines for online surveys. The distribution of the
online questionnaire through electronic means, such as email and social media platforms, followed ethical practices by seeking par­
ticipants who met the eligibility criteria. The researchers also maintained transparency in data collection and analysis processes.
Overall, the study prioritised ethical considerations to safeguard the rights and well-being of all participants and to maintain the
integrity and validity of the research findings.

4. Findings and discussion

4.1. Demographic profiles

During the two-month data collection period, a total of 101 educators participated in the questionnaire survey. The demographic
characteristics of the respondents are succinctly summarized in Table 2. The analysis unveiled that among the respondents, 64.4 % (n
= 65) were male, while 35.6 % (n = 36) were female.
Regarding their highest academic qualifications, 65.3 % of the respondents held a doctoral degree (n = 66), with the remainder
holding master’s degrees (25.7 %, n = 26), postgraduate diplomas (1.1 %, n = 1), and bachelor’s degrees (7.9 %, n = 8). This dis­
tribution accentuates the prevailing gender imbalance within tertiary-level teaching in Jordan, where a significantly higher percentage
of male lecturers (64.4 %, n = 65) and doctorate holders (65.3 %, n = 66) is evident.
Participants’ teaching experience in English was categorized into three cohorts: less than five years (9.9 %, n = 10), 5–9 years (11.9
%, n = 12), and more than nine years (78.2 %, n = 79). Conversely, their experience in teaching online was also stratified into three
groups: less than five years (82.2 %, n = 83), 5–9 years (11.7 %, n = 12), and more than nine years (6.1 %, n = 6). The analysis
underscored a notable incongruity, as a substantial majority of English educators (82.2 %, n = 83) possessed less than five years of
experience in online teaching, signifying the nascent stage of online pedagogy and the integration of modern technology in English
instruction within the Jordanian educational landscape.
In terms of academic rank, respondents were segmented into four categories: full professors (7.9 %), associate professors (19.8 %, n

Table 1
Range of mean score used for interpreting English teachers’ readiness for online teaching.
Mean Score Range Questionnaires Likert Scale Interpretation of Readiness

1.00 to ≤1.80 Not at all familiar Not at all ready

>1.80 to ≤2.61 Slightly familiar Slightly ready
>2.61 to ≤3.41 Somewhat familiar Somewhat ready
>3.41 to ≤4.21 Moderately familiar Reasonably ready
>4.21 to ≤5.00 Extremely familiar Exceptionally ready

6
H. Madanat et al. Heliyon 10 (2024) e25766

Table 2
Demographic profiles of the respondents.
Demographic Profiles Frequency Percent

Gender Male 36 35.6

Female 65 64.4
Highest Academic Qualifications First Degree 8 7.9
Postgraduate Diploma 1 1.0
Master 26 25.7
PhD 66 65.3
Academic Rank Full Professor 8 7.9
Associate Professor 20 19.8
Assistant Professor 34 33.7
Instructor/Lecturer 39 38.6
Teaching Experience Less than 5 years 10 9.9
5–9 years 12 11.9
More than 9 79 78.2
Online Teaching Experience Less than 5 years 84 83.2
5–9 years 11 10.9
More than 9 years 6 5.9

English language educators’ perceptions of their readiness to use online technology.

= 20), assistant professors (33.7 %, n = 34), and instructors/lecturers (38.6 %, n = 39). This stratification underscores a discernible
trend, wherein academic staff members holding positions beyond the lecturer/instructor rank have begun to actively engage in online
teaching in recent years.
Table 3 shows the mean score of the respondents’ perceptions of their ability to use online technology.
Employing the range of means as a framework for interpretation, Table 1 illuminates several pertinent findings. Notably, only one
item, namely ‘using email to communicate with learners’ (with a mean rating of 4.52), garnered an ‘extremely familiar’ rating. Six
items received a classification of ‘moderately familiar,’ encompassing: i) proficiency in basic computer operations (e.g., document
creation and editing, file and folder management) (mean rating of 4.12); ii) adeptness in designing learning activities that facilitate
student interaction (mean rating of 3.92); iii) competence in crafting instructional videos (e.g., lecture recordings, demonstrations,
video tutorials) (mean rating of 3.70); iv) proficiency in moderating discussion forums (mean rating of 3.85); v) facility in utilizing
synchronous web-conferencing tools (e.g., Adobe Connect, Webex, Blackboard Collaborate, Skype) (mean rating of 3.43); and vi)
capability in employing online collaborative tools (e.g., Google Drive, Dropbox) (mean rating of 3.64). Two items, namely ‘creating
videos’ (e.g., iMovie, Movie Maker, Kaltura) (mean rating of 2.99) and ‘accessing online help desk/resources for assistance’ (mean
rating of 3.41), garnered a ‘somewhat familiar’ rating. These findings collectively suggest that the respondents possess commendable
proficiency in online teaching skills; however, they exhibit limited practical experience in applying these competencies. Of particular
note are the two items classified as ‘somewhat familiar,’ which underscore a deficiency in the respondents’ utilization of tools
instrumental for online teaching. Consequently, these findings accentuate the necessity for training interventions aimed at equipping
educators with the requisite skills for effectively utilizing applications and web-based software to create and edit audio-visual content
that supports online teaching.
These findings resonate with the research conducted by Elewa et al. [8], which similarly highlighted that a substantial majority of
participants possessed only moderate computer competency (61.1 %), with merely 38.9 % exhibiting a high level of competency. This
aligns with the imperative recommendation that universities should proactively furnish educators with continuous training on online
course delivery, accompanied by the provision of requisite infrastructure such as laptops and technical support. Furthermore, Nenko
[27] underscores the necessity of ascertaining educators’ proficiency in modern gadgets and electronic communications, which serves
as a gauge of their competency in information and communication technologies, utilization of internet resources, and practical
experience in distance learning.
Within the educational landscape, educators occupy a central and decisive role in shaping educational paradigms and trans­
formations. Suryanti et al. [28] assert the pivotal contribution of educators to the success or failure of online learning systems. Un­
fortunately, educators frequently report limited access to formal online teacher training, necessitating independent efforts to acquire

Table 3
Mean score of the respondents’ perceptions in using online technology.
N Mean SD

Designing learning activities that provide students opportunities for interaction (e.g., discussion forums, wikis) 101 3.9208 1.02648
Creating instructional videos (e.g., lecture videos, demonstrations, video tutorials) 101 3.6931 1.05587
Moderating discussion forums 101 3.8515 1.04294
Using email to communicate with the learners 101 4.5248 .78,223
Using synchronous web-conferencing tools (e.g., Adobe Connect, Webex, Blackboard Collaborate, Skype) 101 3.4257 1.20288
Completing basic computer operations (e.g., creating and editing documents, managing files and folders) 101 4.1584 .93,523
Using online collaborative tools (e.g., Google Drive, Dropbox) 101 3.6436 1.05436
Creating videos (e.g., iMovie, Movie Maker, Kaltura) 101 2.9901 1.18739
Accessing online help desk/resources for assistance 101 3.4059 1.13294

7
H. Madanat et al. Heliyon 10 (2024) e25766

the skills needed for effective remote student engagement, as corroborated by Nguyen et al. [43]. Consequently, it remains imperative
to prioritize educators’ professional growth and development, fostering continuous enhancement not only within their cognitive
domain but also in their pedagogical mastery and skills [44].

4.1.1. English language educators’ perceptions of their readiness to manage courses online
As Table 4 delineates, the second construct comprises five items. These items are indicative of English teachers’ proficiencies in the
realms of creating and deploying course orientation, delineating course objectives, crafting instructional materials, employing
teaching methodologies, and managing copyright materials.
As depicted in Table 4, all five dimensions pertaining to ‘course management skills’ received ratings within the ‘moderately
familiar’ range, spanning from low to high familiarity. Specifically, three dimensions merit attention: i) the creation of an online course
orientation (e.g., introduction, initiation steps) garnered a mean rating of 4.06; ii) the formulation of measurable e-learning objectives
achieved a mean rating of 4.06; iii) the utilization of diverse teaching methodologies in the online milieu (e.g., brainstorming,
collaborative activities, discussions, presentations) secured a mean rating of 4.03. These ratings collectively indicate that the educators
exhibited a moderate level of familiarity in the domain of online course management. Two additional items were evaluated: i) the
organization of e-learning instructional materials into modules or units, which received a ‘moderately familiar’ rating with a mean
score of 3.82; and ii) the application of copyright law and fair use guidelines when utilizing copyrighted materials, similarly rated as
‘moderately familiar’ with a mean score of 3.46.
In concordance with these findings, Suryanti et al. [28] conducted an analogous investigation into teacher readiness for online
instruction, employing the T-PACK self-efficacy scale to gauge teachers’ confidence in their Technological Pedagogical Content
Knowledge (T-PACK). The assessment encompassed three dimensions: Technological Content Knowledge (TCK), Technological
Pedagogical Knowledge (TPK), and Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK). Each dimension garnered an average score
exceeding 4.00. The study’s primary objective was to evaluate teachers’ readiness for online teaching by assessing both the
comprehensiveness of course content and their self-perceived readiness to conduct online instruction. The findings disclosed that
merely 54 % of courses had been comprehensively developed within the Learning Management System (LMS), with a mere 14 %
boasting complete content. Consequently, it can be inferred that teachers in these two categories of content completeness exhibited
commendable readiness, while the remaining 29 % necessitated further readiness enhancement for online teaching.
The cultivation of educators’ professional competence and proficiency should embark upon a lifelong journey, during which ed­
ucators actively engage in continuous professional development through various means and approaches [45]. The ongoing profes­
sional growth educators must undergo at various stages of their professional development journey underscores their commitment to
adhering to excellence principles aligned with contemporary educational trends. This commitment involves the pursuit of a multitude
of approaches and strategies [46].
English language educators’ perceptions of their readiness to use e-learning portal.
Table 5 presents a compilation of ten items that constitute the final construct, denoted as ‘utilizing the e-learning portal.’ These
items encompass both mandatory and discretionary tasks associated with the student assessment process within the e-learning portal.
Mandatory tasks encompass: creating online assignments (mean score of 4.54), generating online quizzes and tests (mean score of
4.39), overseeing online grade management (mean score of 4.37), disseminating announcements and email reminders to course
participants (mean score of 4.54), addressing student inquiries within the e-learning portal (mean score of 4.43), and providing
feedback on assignments through the e-learning portal (mean score of 4.30).
In contrast, optional tasks encompass activities that support the online teaching and learning process. Teachers are not obliged to
undertake these tasks, as they are not directly tied to the student assessment process. Optional tasks encompass: utilizing features
within the e-learning management system for time management purposes (e.g., online grading, rubrics, SpeedGrader, calendar) (mean
score of 3.70), navigating within the course framework within the learning management system (e.g., Moodle, Canvas, Blackboard,
etc.) (mean score of 3.83), employing the course roster within the learning management system to establish teams or groups (mean
score of 3.48), and sharing open educational resources (e.g., learning websites, web resources, games, and simulations) through the e-
learning portal (mean score of 3.66).
The mean scores attributed to mandatory tasks signify that the respondents exhibited an ‘extremely familiar’ level of proficiency in
executing these online tasks within the e-learning portal. Conversely, the mean scores associated with optional tasks remained rela­
tively low, indicating a lesser degree of involvement in these discretionary tasks within the e-learning portal.

4.1.1.1. English language educators’ readiness in teaching online. Utilizing descriptive analysis, the mean scores of all items within each
construct were compiled and computed to assess the extent of readiness for online teaching among English language educators. Table 5

Table 4
Mean score of the respondents’ perceptions on their readiness for managing courses online.
N Mean SD

Creating an online course orientation (e.g., introduction, getting started) 101 4.0594 .91,457
Writing measurable e-learning objectives 101 4.0594 1.00818
Organizing e-learning instructional materials into modules or units 101 3.8218 .98,383
Using different teaching methods in the online environment (e.g., brainstorming, collaborative activities, discussions, presentations) 101 4.0297 .92,147
Applying copyright law and fair use guidelines when using copyrighted materials 101 3.4554 1.23713

8
H. Madanat et al. Heliyon 10 (2024) e25766

Table 5
Mean score of the respondents’ perceptions of their readiness to use the e-learning portal.
N Mean SD

Creating online quizzes and tests 101 4.3861 .85,989

Creating online assignments 101 4.5446 .71,449
Managing grades online 101 4.3663 .86,859
Sending announcements/email reminders to course participants 101 4.5446 .76,844
Responding to student questions on the e-learning portal 101 4.4257 .82,881
Providing feedback on assignments through the e-learning portal 101 4.2970 .81,908
Using features in e-learning management system in order to manage time (e.g., online grading, rubrics, SpeedGrader, calendar) 101 3.7030 1.10946
Navigating within the course in the learning management system (e.g., Moodle, Canvas, Blackboard, etc.) 101 3.8317 .98,050
Using course roster in the learning management system to set up teams/groups 101 3.4752 1.11887
Sharing open educational resources (e.g., learning websites, Web resources, games and simulations) on the e-learning portal 101 3.6634 1.15998

presents a comprehensive overview of the aggregate mean scores encompassing all three constructs.
Based on the data presented in Tables 5 and it is evident that the respondents exhibited a moderate level of familiarity with online
technology (mean score of 3.73) and the e-learning portal (mean score of 4.12). Similarly, their level of familiarity with the man­
agement of courses online was also moderate (mean score of 3.89). This moderate familiarity is postulated to stem from their recent
involvement in online teaching during the pandemic. However, it is noteworthy that their comprehension of the e-learning portal’s
utilization was not as robust as anticipated. This discrepancy could be attributed to the respondents’ underutilization of the optional
resources within the portal designed to enhance the student learning experience.
Collectively, the mean score across all constructs amounts to 3.91, indicative of a reasonably prepared state among English lan­
guage educators for online teaching. Nonetheless, there exists room for further refinement of their expertise in the utilization of certain
technological tools, warranting encouragement for more frequent usage. It is pivotal to acknowledge that institutional support plays a
pivotal role in educators’ preparedness to navigate the challenges and shifts within teaching pedagogy. The effectiveness of the
teaching process hinges on various interrelated factors. Notably, McGee et al. [6] identified key elements supporting proficiency in
online teaching, including formal instructor training, the provision of external support mechanisms, and experiential learning. Of
particular value are comprehensive training initiatives coupled with just-in-time support, especially when aligned with real-world
scenarios encountered during online teaching. This is particularly salient given the potential stress and time constraints associated
with online instruction for educators less acquainted with the modality [47].
However, it is essential to acknowledge certain limitations within this study. Firstly, the sample size was relatively modest,
potentially limiting its representativeness on a broader scale. Secondly, the reliance on self-reported data may have introduced social
desirability bias. Lastly, the study’s scope was confined to specific geographical locales (i.e., universities in Jordan), potentially
curbing the generalizability of its findings to alternative contexts.

5. Implications and recommendations for language educators, policymakers and future research

Findings derived from this research provide valuable insights into the readiness of Jordanian English language educators for online
teaching. However, it is essential to acknowledge that the educators in this study may benefit from increased exposure to the diverse
array of tools available on e-learning portals. This exposure could significantly enhance their confidence and proficiency in utilizing
these online platforms effectively. Additionally, educators should actively engage in various online professional development op­
portunities to self-assess their knowledge and competence in online teaching. Participation in online tutorials and workshops can serve
as valuable means to acquire additional support and enhance their online teaching proficiency.
Policymakers and educational authorities should undertake a comprehensive assessment of the policies implemented to facilitate
educators’ online professional engagement, particularly during the tumultuous years of the COVID-19 pandemic. This assessment
should encompass an in-depth examination of the outcomes, with a keen eye on the alignment of these policies with sectoral and
overarching objectives. Any necessary actions, such as reconsideration, strategic adjustment, policy reformulation, or intensified
implementation, should be taken in light of this holistic evaluation. Moreover, policymakers should scrutinize the congruence of the
English language teaching curriculum with modern technological advancements, ensuring that it aligns with existing policy frame­
works and objectives.
It is imperative to acknowledge that this study primarily focused on English language educators’ self-assessed readiness for online
teaching, which may not fully reflect their actual preparedness for this mode of instruction. To provide a more comprehensive un­
derstanding, future researchers should consider exploring educators’ competency in online education from the perspective of their
students. This approach would yield valuable insights into the practical efficacy of educators’ online teaching practices.
Furthermore, future research endeavors should encompass additional constructs beyond those examined in this study. For instance,
the inclusion of constructs such as ‘time management competency,’ ‘self-confidence,’ and ‘accessibility and range of online technology’
could further enrich the findings and offer a more nuanced perspective on educators’ online readiness. Comparative analyses tracking
the gradual improvement of English educators’ online teaching competency over time should also be explored in future research.
Lastly, future researchers could delve into sectoral competency mapping of English educators, employing stratified random
sampling techniques that take into account factors such as the location of university campuses, distinguishing between urban and rural
settings. This approach would yield valuable insights into potential regional variations in educators’ online teaching preparedness,

9
H. Madanat et al. Heliyon 10 (2024) e25766

thus contributing to a more comprehensive understanding of the landscape of online education in Jordan.

5.1. Limitations of the study

While this research employed a comprehensive and diligently executed online survey methodology, it is vital to recognize certain
limitations that could affect the interpretation and generalizability of the findings. Firstly, the potential for sampling bias exists, given
the reliance on electronic means for participant recruitment, which may inadvertently exclude less digitally connected or less active
individuals. Secondly, self-reported data obtained through online questionnaires could introduce social desirability bias, potentially
inflating or skewing participants’ reported levels of readiness for online teaching. Additionally, the study’s geographic focus on
Jordanian universities limits the generalizability of findings to other educational contexts, and the cross-sectional design captures a
specific point in time without accounting for potential longitudinal developments. Moreover, while the questionnaire was adapted
from existing sources, its validity and reliability in the specific context may not have been rigorously established. Finally, the influence
of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic on educators’ readiness levels for online teaching should be considered, as it may have shaped the
results. Awareness of these limitations is crucial when interpreting and applying the study’s outcomes.

6. Conclusion

The findings of this study provide valuable insights into the readiness of Jordanian English educators for online teaching. It is
evident that these educators possess a moderate level of readiness in this domain. However, a closer examination reveals that their
technology-related skills received comparatively lower ratings in contrast to their proficiency in course handling and specific e-
learning portal skills. This discrepancy suggests a pressing need for further training and development initiatives aimed at bolstering
educators’ confidence in utilizing technology as a pedagogical tool.
To address these findings, it is imperative that educational institutions proactively design and implement professional development
opportunities tailored to enhance educators’ competencies across three pivotal domains: technology utilization, course management,
and proficiency in utilizing specific e-learning portals. These initiatives should encompass a comprehensive curriculum covering the
effective design, delivery, and management of online courses. Workshops, seminars, and online training modules can serve as effective
mediums through which educators can acquire the requisite knowledge and skills.
Furthermore, the study underscores the importance of fostering a culture of continuous professional development among educators
to ensure their alignment with the latest trends and best practices in online teaching. This can be achieved by actively encouraging
educators to engage in online communities, participate in conferences, and attend webinars focused on online teaching. Such
engagement would not only enhance their expertise but also promote knowledge sharing and the dissemination of innovative teaching
methodologies.
Lastly, the study sheds light on the fact that online education in Jordanian universities is still in its early stages of development, and
the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the adoption of online teaching modalities. In light of this, educational in­
stitutions must embrace this paradigm shift and allocate the necessary resources to support its seamless implementation. This includes
providing educators with essential technology tools and infrastructure, such as reliable internet connections and unhindered access to
e-learning portals. By doing so, institutions can ensure that educators are well-equipped to navigate the evolving landscape of online
education effectively, ultimately benefiting both educators and their students.

Data availability statement

The data that support the results presented in this paper are available from the corresponding author, upon reasonable request.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Hanan Madanat: Writing – original draft. Radzuwan Ab Rashid: Writing – review & editing, Supervision, Methodology,
Investigation, Formal analysis, Data curation. Umair Munir Hashmi: Validation, Methodology, Formal analysis. Misrah Mohamed:
Writing – review & editing, Formal analysis. Omar Ali Al Smadi: Writing – review & editing, Validation, Conceptualization. Marwan
Harb Alqaryouti: Validation, Methodology, Data curation, Conceptualization.

Declaration of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process

During the preparation of this work the authors used ChatGPT in order to improve the clarity of the sentences. After using this tool/
service, the authors reviewed and edited the content as needed and take full responsibility for the content of the publication.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.

10
H. Madanat et al. Heliyon 10 (2024) e25766

Appendix A. Supplementary data

Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e25766.

References

[1] G. Zeybek, Investigate pre-service teachers’ readiness levels for online learning and engagement levels in the online environment, J. Learn. Develop. 9 (2022)
190–208, https://doi.org/10.56059/jl4d.v9i2.538.
[2] P.D. MacIntyre, T. Gregersen, S. Mercer, Language teachers’ coping strategies during the Covid-19 conversion to online teaching: Correlations with stress,
wellbeing and negative emotions, System 94 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102352.
[3] N. Johnson, G. Veletsianos, J. Seaman, US faculty and administrators’ experiences and approaches in the early weeks of the COVID-19 pandemic, Online Learn.
24 (2020) 6–21, https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v24i2.2285.
[4] D. Turnbull, R. Chugh, J. Luck, Transitioning to E-learning during the COVID-19 pandemic: how have higher education institutions responded to the challenge?
Educ. Inf. Technol. 26 (2021) 6401–6419, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10633-w.
[5] Z. Ali, 21st-century learning: understanding the language learning strategies with technology literacy among l2 learners, JONUS 7 (2022) 202–220, https://doi.
org/10.24200/jonus.vol7iss2pp202-220.
[6] P. McGee, D. Windes, M. Torres, Experienced online instructors: beliefs and preferred supports regarding online teaching, J. Comput. High Educ. 29 (2017)
331–352, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-017-9140-6.
[7] W.W. Porter, C.R. Graham, R.G. Bodily, D.S. Sandberg, A qualitative analysis of institutional drivers and barriers to blended learning adoption in higher
education, Internet High Educ. 28 (2016) 17–27, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.08.003.
[8] A.H. Elewa, Online teaching readiness, challenges and satisfaction as perceived by nursing faculty members during COVID-19 pandemics, Int. Egyp. J. Nurs. Sci.
Research 2 (2022) 568–579, https://doi.org/10.21608/EJNSR.2022.212573.
[9] D. Ravid, J. White, T. Behrend, Implications of COVID-19 for privacy at work, Indus, Org. Psychol. 14 (2021) 194–198, https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2021.29.
[10] J.M. Fernández-Batanero, M. Montenegro-Rueda, J. Fernández-Cerero, P. Tadeu, Online education in higher education: emerging solutions in crisis times,
Heliyon 8 (2022) e10139, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10139.
[11] D.U. Bolliger, C. Halupa, An investigation of instructors’ online teaching readiness, TechTrends 66 (2022) 185–195, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-021-
00654-0.
[12] R. Scherer, S.K. Howard, J. Tondeur, F. Siddiq, Profiling teachers’ readiness for online teaching and learning in higher education: who’s ready? Compu. human
beh. 118 (2021) 106675 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106675.
[13] L. Pagliari, D. Batts, C.C. McFadden, Desired versus actual training for online instructors in community colleges, J. Dist. Learn. Admins. 18 (2009) 1–15. http://
hdl.handle.net/10342/2176.
[14] N.J.A. Ghulamuddin, T.I.S.T. Sharif, Z. Abd Rahman, Stem students’ English language learning strategies and underlying factors about open distance learning,
JONUS 7 (2022) 81–102, https://doi.org/10.24200/jonus.vol7iss2pp81-102.
[15] J. Allen, L. Rowan, P. Singh, Teaching and teacher education in the time of COVID-19, Asia-Pacific J. Teach, Educ. Next 48 (2020) 233–236, https://doi.org/
10.1080/1359866x.2020.1752051.
[16] R. O’Dowd, M. Dooly, Exploring teachers’ professional development through participation in virtual exchange, ReCALL 34 (2022) 21–36, https://doi.org/
10.1017/S0958344021000215.
[17] R.M. Cutri, J. Mena, E.F. Whiting, Faculty readiness for online crisis teaching: Transitioning to online teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic, Eur. J. Teach.
Educ. 43 523–541, https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2020.1815702.
[18] M. Back, K. Golembeski, A. Gutiérrez, T. Macko, S. Miller, D.L. Pelletier, We were told that the content we delivered was not as important: disconnect and
disparities in world language student teaching during COVID-19, System 103 (2021) 102679, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102679.
[19] M. Alger, J. Eyckmans, I took physical lessons for granted: a case study exploring students’ interpersonal interactions in online synchronous lessons during the
outbreak of COVID-19, System 105 (2022) 102716, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102716.
[20] C. Payant, M. Zuniga, Learners’ flow experience during peer revision in a virtual writing course during the global pandemic, System 105 (2022) 102715,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102715.
[21] A. Ruiz-Alonso-Bartol, D. Querrien, S. Dykstra, P. Fernández-Mira, C. Sanchez-Gutierrez, Transitioning to emergency online teaching: the experience of Spanish
language learners in a US university, System 104 (2022) 102684, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102684.
[22] R. Al, Muheisen, Jordan ‘left behind’ on Global Knowledge Index 2021, The Jordan Times, 2022.
[23] Z. Almahasees, H. Jaccomard, Facebook translation service (FTS) usage among jordanians during COVID-19 lockdown, Adv. Sci. Technol. Eng. Syst. J. 5 (2020)
514–519, https://doi.org/10.25046/aj050661.
[24] G.H.E. Gay, An assessment of online instructor e-learning readiness before, during, and after course delivery, J. Comput. High Educ. 28 (2016) 199–220, https://
doi.org/10.1007/s12528-016-9115-z.
[25] T.T.N. Phan, L.T.T. Dang, Teacher readiness for online teaching: a critical review, 30th Anul. Conf. Asian Assoc. Open Uni. 3 (2017) 1–16. https://api.
semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:235365942.
[26] F. Martin, K. Budhrani, C. Wang, Examining faculty perception of their readiness to teach online, Online Learn. 23 (2019) 97–119, https://doi.org/10.24059/
olj.v23i3.1555.
[27] Y. Nenko, Teachers’ readiness for distance education: from theory to practice, in: L. Naumovska (Ed.), The Impact of COVID19 on the International Education
System, Proud Pen, 2020, pp. 150–161, https://doi.org/10.51432/978-1-8381524-0-6_11.
[28] S. Suryanti, D. Sutaji, T. Nusantara, An assessment of teachers’ readiness for online teaching, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 1933 (2021) 012117, https://doi.org/10.1088/
1742-6596/1933/1/012117.
[29] E. Polat, S. Hopcan, O. Yahsi, Are K-12 teachers ready for e-learning? Int. Rev. Res. Open Dist. Learn. 23 (2022) 214–241, https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.
v23i2.6082.
[30] M. Sarrfaz, G. Hussain, M. Shahid, A. Riaz, M. Muavia, Y.S. Fahed, F. Azam, M.T. Abdullah, Medical students’ online learning perceptions, online learning
readiness, and learning outcomes during COVID 19: the moderating role of teacher’s readiness to teach online, Int. J. Environ. Res. Publ. Health 19 (2022) 3520,
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19063520.
[31] R. Goutam B. Rasel, A.K. Md, Y. Nowreen, Z. Tata, R. Samir, Response, readiness and challenges of online teaching amid COVID-19 pandemic: the case of higher
education in Bangladesh, Educ. Develop. Psychol. 40 (2021) 40–50, https://doi.org/10.1080/20590776.2021.1997066.
[32] F.-B. Gabriella, F. Esther, T. Kaye, Reimagining teacher identity in the post-Covid-19 university: becoming digitally savvy, reflective in practice, collaborative,
and relational, Educ. Develop. Psychol. 40 (2022) 18–26, https://doi.org/10.1080/20590776.2022.2079406.
[33] B.S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook I: the Cognitive Domain, David McKay Co Inc, New York, 1956.
[34] J. Graham, C. Colin, Exploring the dynamics of education in Australia: policies, practices, and progressions in the 21st century, INFLUENCE: intl, J. Sci. Rev. 5
(2023) 14–23, https://doi.org/10.54783/influencejournal.v5i3.178.
[35] M.J. Koehler, P. Mishra, Technological pedagogical content knowledge: a framework for teacher knowledge, Teach. Coll. Rec. 108 (2006) 1017–1054, https://
doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x.
[36] M.S.D.P. Nayak, K.A. Narayan, Strengths and weaknesses of online surveys, Technology 6 (2019) 31–38, https://doi.org/10.9790/0837-2405053138.

11
H. Madanat et al. Heliyon 10 (2024) e25766

[37] H. Taherdoost, Sampling methods in research methodology; how to choose a sampling technique for research. How to choose a sampling technique for research,
Int. J. Acad. Res. Manag. 5 (2016) 18–27, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3205035.
[38] I. Etikan, O. Babtope, A basic approach in sampling methodology and sample size calculation, Med. Life Clin. 1 (2019) 50–54. https://api.semanticscholar.org/
CorpusID:212714840.
[39] J.G. Ponterotto, D.E. Ruckdeschel, An overview of coefficient alpha and a reliability matrix for estimating adequacy of internal consistency coefficients with
psychological research measures, Percept. Mot. Skills 105 (2007) 997–1014, https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.105.3.997-1014.
[40] S. Tuntirojanawong, Students’ readiness for e-learning: a case study of sukhothai thammathirat open university, Thailand, J. e Learn. High Educ. 9 (2013)
59–66. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1143992.pdf.
[41] Y. Unal, G. Alir, I. Soydal, Students readiness for e-learning: an assessment on Hacettepe university department of information management, in: J.N. Gathegi,
Y. Tonta, S. kurbanoglu, Z. Taskin (Eds.), Challenges of Information Management beyond the Cloud, Springer, 2014, pp. 137–147.
[42] R. Los, A. De Jaeger, B.M. Stoesz, Online and blended teaching readiness assessment, Front. Educ. 6 (2021) 673594, https://doi.org/10.3389/
feduc.2021.673594.
[43] N.H. Nguyen, T.L.N. Tran, L.T. Nguyen, T.A. Nguyen, M.T. Nguyen, The interaction patterns of pandemic-initiated online teaching: how teachers adapted,
System 105 (2022) 102755, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2022.102755.
[44] A. Craft, Continuing Professional Development: A Practical Guide for Teachers and Schools, Rouledge Falmer, London, UK, 2000.
[45] K. Kuchah, F. Shamim, International Perspectives on Teaching English in Difficult Circumstances: Contexts, Challenges and Possibilities, Palgrave Micllan,
London, 2018.
[46] R.E. Garcia, English as international language: a review of the literature, Colom. Appl. Lingu. J. 15 (2013) 113–127, https://doi.org/10.14483/udistrital.jour.
calj.2013.1.a08.
[47] K.M. Moser, T. Wei, D. Brenner, Remote teaching during COVID-19: implications from a national survey of language educators, System 97 (2021) 102431,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102431.

12