2020
DOI: 10.37237/110310
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Emergency Remote Support at the Self-Access Learning Center: Successes and Limitations

Tetsushi Ohara,
Fumie Ishimura

Abstract: The COVID-19 pandemic of 2020 has influenced many aspects of tertiary educational institutions in Japan. Many Self-Access Learning Centers (SALCs) at universities are also required to change their operation and support systems. This paper introduces how the SALC at Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific University (APU) has supported students during the COVID-19 pandemic and discusses successful points and limitations of the online support system, which is characterized as emergency remote support (ERS). The research analyz… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The Future Role of Online Consultations Hodges et al (2020) discuss the difference between emergency responses versus planned-out online services in classroom environments. Ohara and Ishimura (2020) agree with this idea within SALCs in Japan, postulating that actions by SALC staff primarily represent an emergency response. Based on this, many studies assessing the outcomes of online consultations can be considered reactionary planning in response to a temporary and unfortunate situation rather than a consideration for the expected future role of online support.…”
Section: Post-pandemic Online Consultationsmentioning
confidence: 75%
“…The Future Role of Online Consultations Hodges et al (2020) discuss the difference between emergency responses versus planned-out online services in classroom environments. Ohara and Ishimura (2020) agree with this idea within SALCs in Japan, postulating that actions by SALC staff primarily represent an emergency response. Based on this, many studies assessing the outcomes of online consultations can be considered reactionary planning in response to a temporary and unfortunate situation rather than a consideration for the expected future role of online support.…”
Section: Post-pandemic Online Consultationsmentioning
confidence: 75%
“…As in Harwood and Koyoma's (2020) study, we noticed no differences in students' predisposition to engage in conversation, questioning and learning in online compared to in-person appointments. Learning advisers encouraged student engagement in online appointments through the use of tools such as screen sharing, annotations, and chat, as in reports by Davies et al (2020) and Ohara and Ishimura (2020). We did not have a large enough sample size of phone users to compare student satisfaction reliably; however, our learning advisers found phone appointments to be more difficult to administer since they were unable to view documents together with the student.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The learning advisers described by Davies et al (2020) were initially concerned about moving appointments online during the pandemic as they thought students would be worried about talking online, particularly if they had never met the adviser in person. Once online bookings opened, Mullen et al (2021) found that fewer students made use of online appointments at the start of the pandemic, Ohara and Ishimura (2020) observed no change in appointment numbers and other learning centres found that their appointment numbers increased significantly (Cavaleri & Tran, 2021;Davies et al, 2020).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In our weekly (by then, online) meetings, we discussed some of the challenges of establishing rapport through functions natural in face-to-face contexts but more difficult online, i.e., establishing eye contact and using body language to create a warm and welcoming atmosphere. Another missing feature was our busy self-access centre's usual buzzing background noise (a factor also noted by Ohara and Ishimura, 2020).…”
Section: Context and Background To The Studiesmentioning
confidence: 98%