University EFL instructors’ Perceptions of Hybrid and Online Education After the Devastating Earthquake in Türkiye
Öz
This piece of research aims to discover university EFL instructors’ attitudes towards hybrid and online education in the aftermath of the devastating 2023 earthquakes in Türkiye. Adopting a mixed-methods design, the research collected its quantitative data from 53 instructors through a Likert-scale questionnaire and qualitative data from two semi-structured interviews. Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney U tests indicated no statistically significant differences in attitudes across gender, professional experience, or education level. However, descriptive results indicated that female and less experienced instructors held more positive views toward online education. Interview findings supported these results, showing that the less experienced instructor favoured online learning for its practicality, while the more experienced one preferred face-to-face instruction for its communicative richness. Both instructors viewed hybrid education as the least effective model. The study discusses implications for post-disaster digital pedagogy and future EFL teacher training.
Anahtar Kelimeler
EFL instructors, online education, hybrid education, post-disaster teaching, Türkiye earthquake
Kaynakça
- Akbari, E. (2025). A cross-sectional study of teachers’ and students’ preferences for educational methods in the post-COVID-19 era. Frontiers in Education, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1564905
- Asgari, H., Gupta, R., Titiloye, I., & Jin, X. (2022). Challenges, perceptions, and future preferences for post-secondary online education given experiences in the COVID-19 outbreak. Computational Urban Science, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43762-022-00058-7.
- Bozkurt, A., & Sharma, R. C. (2020). Emergency remote teaching in a time of global crisis due to CoronaVirus pandemic. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3778083
- Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2000). Research methods in education (5th ed.). RoutledgeFalmer.
- Creswell, J. W. (2021). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (6th ed.). Pearson.
- Elhaty, I. A., & Elhadary, T. M. (2023). Higher education transformation during COVID-19: Challenges and future directions. Education and Information Technologies, 28, 1301–1318. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11304-z
- Er, A., & Farhady, H. (2023). Pedagogical dimensions of online teaching in English language education: Lessons from the pandemic. Journal of Language and Education, 9(2), 12–28. https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2023.127
- Fidalgo, P., Thormann, J., Kulyk, O., & Lencastre, J. A. (2020). Students’ perceptions on distance education: A multinational study. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17(1), 18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-00194-2
- Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (4th ed.). Sage.
- Gheyle, N. & Jacobs, T. (2017). Content analysis: A short overview. Internal research note.