Teachers’ concerns and teaching experience during the pandemic and beyond: implications for research, policy and practice

Cogent Education ISSN: 2331-186X (Online) Journal homepage: www.tandfonline.com/journals/oaed20 Teachers’ concerns and teaching experience during the pandemic and beyond: implications for research, policy and practice Diana Pereira, Diana Aguiar Vieira, Maria Assunção Flores, Eusébio André Machado & Eva Fernandes To cite this article: Diana Pereira, Diana Aguiar Vieira, Maria Assunção Flores, Eusébio André Machado & Eva Fernandes (2025) Teachers’ concerns and teaching experience during the pandemic and beyond: implications for research, policy and practice, Cogent Education, 12:1, 2461395, DOI: 10.1080/2331186X.2025.2461395 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2025.2461395 © 2025 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group Published online: 07 Feb 2025. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 1610 View related articles View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=oaed20 TEACHER EDUCATION & DEVELOPMENT | RESEARCH ARTICLE Teachers’concerns and teaching experience during the pandemic and beyond: implications for research, policy and practice Diana Pereira a , Diana Aguiar Vieira b , Maria Assunc¸~ ao Flores a , Eus ebio Andr e Machado c and Eva Fernandes a a Research Centre on Child Studies, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal; b Social Sciences, Polytechnic of Porto, Porto Accounting and Business School, Instituto Polit ecnico do Porto, Porto, Portugal; c Department of Psychology and Education, Universidade Portucalense, Porto, Portugal ABSTRACT This paper reports on findings arising from a wider study aimed at investigating teachers’concerns during the pandemic and their views regarding changes in teaching in the post-COVID context. Adopting a mixed-method approach, data were gathered through a survey including both open-ended and closed-ended questions. The study involved 2,192 teachers from all sectors of education. Both the quantitative and qualitative data indicate that teachers’most frequent concerns are related to students and their families, to their own personal issues, to poor working conditions, and to work-life balance. Furthermore, the findings suggest that the teaching experience during the second lockdown was generally more positive compared to the first lockdown. The participants advocate for changes in the post-pandemic scenario, particularly focusing on continuous professional development, enhancing institutional conditions, and securing access to adequate resources. Differences in responses to sociodemographic questions were also found relating to Remote Teaching Concerns (RTC) and Remote Teaching Experience (RTE). This study offers implications for further research, policy development, and practical applications in the field. ARTICLE HISTORY Received 4 November 2024 Revised 16 January 2025 Accepted 28 January 2025 KEYWORDS Distance education; teachers’experience; teachers’well-being; postpandemic; professional development SUBJECTS Sustainability Education, Training & Leadership; Teachers & Teacher Education; Continuing Professional Development; Education Policy & Politics Introduction Education around the world has undergone unprecedented change, especially in response to the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic. The key challenge in this context involved the shift to distance learning, which required both students and teachers to adapt to new methods of teaching and learning, highlighting the need for greater flexibility and personalization in education (Gonz alez et al., 2023). In Portugal, the Digital Transition Action Plan (Resolution no. 31/2020) served as a framework to promote digital transformation and innovation across the country, which involved investments in digital infrastructure, skills development and digital innovation. Additional measures were also taken in order to address the impact of the pandemic on education (Decree-Law no. 20-H/2020), on teachers’work and on curriculum development (Decree-Law no. 10-b/2021). These measures aimed to guarantee the continuity of educational and teaching activities in a fair and equitable way. Nevertheless, teachers had to face a range of challenges and concerns during COVID-19 times. Existing literature reports issues concerning learning loss (Di Pietro, 2023; Flores et al., 2024; Maldonado & De Witt, 2022; NFER, 2020), lack of conditions and access to technological resources (Flores, Machado et al., 2021; Judd et al., 2020) and issues of well-being (Alves et al., 2020; Anderson et al., 2020; Elharake et al., 2023; Folkman et al., 2023; Kim et al., 2022; Tang, 2023; Woltran et al., 2021). Involvement in distance teaching and learning brought about transformations in teachers’work as well as shifts in the emotional dynamics of teaching and learning, potentially affecting the overall teaching experience (Hargreaves, 2021) and intensifying teacher shortages (Gillani et al., 2022; Wharton-Beck CONTACT Diana Pereira [email protected] Research Centre on Child Studies, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal This article has been corrected with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article. ß2025 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The terms on which this article has been published allow the posting of the Accepted Manuscript in a repository by the author(s) or with their consent. COGENT EDUCATION 2025, VOL. 12, NO. 1, 2461395 https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2025.2461395 et al., 2024). However, some studies suggest that teachers experienced a generally positive adaptation process, managing to implement their pre-planned teaching strategies effectively, even in the face of significant challenges (Flores et al., 2024). Based on these challenges, discussions have emerged around education in the post-COVID-19 era. Although some empirical studies have looked into these issues, more needs to be known in the aftermath of the pandemic. Furthermore, a significant number of published studies tend to be descriptive in nature, providing superficial findings and the absence of mixedmethod approaches hinders the ability to obtain a comprehensive understanding of the situation (Woltran et al., 2021). The goal of this study is to integrate data from a comprehensive nationwide online survey including both quantitative and qualitative data. To contribute to the growing literature on the lasting effects beyond the pandemic, this study has focused on teachers’concerns during the second lockdown, comparing their experience of remote teaching between the first and second lockdowns and seeking to understand their perspectives on the changes in teaching in the post-COVID era. Teachers’concerns and experiences Several studies have emphasized that one of the most prevalent concerns among teachers was student engagement, particularly as traditional learning environments were disrupted. Teachers had to devise new strategies to motivate students, hold them accountable for their learning, and provide support in remote or hybrid settings (  Avalos et al., 2022; Di Pietro, 2023; Flores, Machado et al., 2021; Francom et al., 2021; Phillips et al., 2024). Multiple challenges had an adverse impact on students’learning experiences, including information overload, the need for advanced technical skills, reduced social interactions (Conrad et al., 2022), and challenges related to access to the internet and computers (Francom et al., 2021). Personal and student-related challenges have also emerged in the literature as significant concerns for teachers during these difficult times. Research highlights the emotional exhaustion experienced by teachers (Chan et al., 2021) and the high levels of stress they faced (Alves et al., 2020; Anderson et al., 2020; Flores, Barros et al., 2021), which may negatively impact student outcomes (Robinson et al., 2023), diminish teachers’sense of agency (Heikkil€ a & Mankki, 2021), and reduce their capacity to offer creative learning opportunities (Anderson et al., 2020). Given the unexpected changes in family dynamics during these challenging times, working mothers, for instance, faced an increased burden, leading to negative emotions and a decline in their psychological well-being (Clark et al., 2021). Research further indicates that teachers have been increasingly concerned with students’well-being, extending beyond academic performance (Robinson et al., 2023). In fact, teachers often perceive their own difficulties as less significant compared to the challenges faced by their students (  Avalos et al., 2022). Since teachers were not able to closely monitor students’well-being, it was a matter of great concern from the teachers’point of view (Kim & Asbury, 2020). The study by Folkman et al. (2023) suggests that, as a consequence of the pandemic, the role of teachers in ensuring social and emotional well-being has been strengthened. Moreover, with closure of schools, teachers had to balance their work responsibilities with their personal lives. This has been particularly challenging and a cause of concern for female teachers with young children or sick family members (Auger & Formentin, 2021; Rawal, 2023). Other studies found that teachers who had to work from home during the pandemic faced irregular working hours, role conflicts and lack of proper working conditions (€ Unal & Dulay, 2022). The inappropriate conditions put a significant pressure on teachers. Different issues were well documented in the literature such as access to technology and software, reliable internet connections and training on how to use digital tools effectively (Francom et al., 2021; Henriques et al., 2021). Time management, particularly the additional time required by remote learning as well as the workload, were also significant challenges for teachers during the lockdown (Prado-Gasc o et al., 2020). Teachers had to develop new strategies to manage their time effectively and balance their teaching responsibilities with their personal obligations (Auger & Formentin, 2021; Phillips et al., 2024; Rawal, 2023; Woltran et al., 2021). Research has identified three distinct teacher profiles: ‘relaxed teachers’,‘worried and stressed teachers’, and ‘happy workaholic teachers’, suggesting that these categories may influence how educators coped with and experienced the changes brought about by the pandemic (Kupers et al., 2022). Despite the challenges associated with remote teaching during the first lockdown, the extant literature indicates that it also fostered positive experiences in terms of new learning opportunities and the 2 D. PEREIRA ET AL. development of skills for both teachers and students (Flores, Machado et al., 2021). For students, the increased use of digital technology has had a positive impact on learning and engagement, fostering greater adaptability, initiative, and innovation in teaching (Anggadwita et al., 2024). For teachers, it has provided an opportunity to collaborate with new colleagues in professional service teams in ways that were not previously explored (Dissanayeke et al., 2024). These experiences fundamentally reshaped interactions with students by enabling the effective integration of innovative tools to diversify the curriculum (Scull et al., 2020) while also promoting collaborative and interactive learning environments (Gonz alez et al., 2023). Previous research also supports this perspective, illustrating that, for instance, the adaptation of assessment practices in remote teaching fostered an environment conducive to pedagogical reflection and innovation among educators (Yakimova et al., 2023). The pandemic catalyzed a reassessment of teachers’roles and professional identities, encouraging the adoption of innovative pedagogical approaches while simultaneously questioning established models of continuous professional development (Dempsey & Mestry, 2023). Moreover, existing literature underscored the necessity for more adaptive and responsive teaching strategies that correspond to the changing educational landscape. It emphasized the importance of investing in teacher education and developing learning environments that promote innovative approaches, encouraging collaborative and interactive experiences (Gonz alez et al., 2023). It is therefore important to better understand the perceptions of Portuguese teachers regarding their concerns, experiences and perspectives about changes in teaching in the aftermath of the pandemic. Method Research questions This study aims to explore teachers’concerns during the second lockdown (2021) and compare the remote teaching experience between the first and second lockdowns but also to understand how they view changes in teaching in the post-COVID era. Subsequently, the following research questions (RQ) were used to guide the present study: RQ1. What were the teachers’key concerns in the second period of remote teaching? RQ1.1. Are there any gender differences in teachers’concerns? RQ1.2. Are there any age differences in teachers’concerns? RQ1.3. Are there any differences in teachers’concerns according to teaching experience? RQ1.4. Are there any differences in teachers’concerns with regard to teaching sector? RQ2. How did teachers experience the second lockdown compared to the first one? RQ2.1. Are there any gender differences in teachers’experience? RQ2.2. Are there any age differences in teachers’experience? RQ2.3. Are there any differences in teachers’experience according to years of teaching? RQ2.4. Are there any differences in teachers’experience regarding teaching sector? RQ3. How do teachers perceive the impact of the pandemic on teaching practices, particularly in terms of systemic changes, teachers’roles, and instructional strategies? Participants The sample consisted of 2,192 teachers from different teaching sectors (cf. Table 1). Most participants were female (82.2%) and aged over 50 years old. In addition, 24.6% of the teachers were aged between 51 and 55 years old, 21.7% between 56 and 60 years old, 11.0% between 61 and 65 years old, and .4% aged over 65 years old. The participants are a group of experienced teachers, 21.4% having between 21 and 25 years of teaching experience, 21.8% having between 26 and 30 years’experience, and 20.7% having between 31 and 35 years of experience as teachers (cf. Table 1). Teachers who responded to the online questionnaire taught different subjects. Additionally, 65.3% hold a bachelor’s(Licenciatura) COGENT EDUCATION 3 degree, 22.0% hold a master’s degree and 2.9% a PhD. The participants taught in all education sectors (from preschool to secondary school). The participants are from all regions of Portugal, including the Autonomous Regions of Madeira and the Azores: 47.8% are from the Northern Region, 25.5% from the Center, 15.0% from the Lisbon and Tejo Valley region, 4.7% from the Algarve, 2.8% from the Autonomous Region of Madeira, 2.7% from Alentejo and 1.5% from the Autonomous Region of the Azores. Finally, 95.8% of teachers worked in state schools, 44.7% of the schools are in urban areas, 36.0% in suburban areas and 19.3% in rural areas. The students who attended the participants’schools are predominantly of middle (66.3%) and low (31.1%) socioeconomic status (cf. Table 1). Instruments A questionnaire based on a previous study of the experience of teachers in remote teaching, which resulted from both legal and theoretical frameworks related to teaching and assessment, was devised Table 1. Participants. f% Gender Male 391 17.8 Female 1,801 82.2 Age 21–25 4 0.2 26–30 17 0.8 31–35 16 0.7 36–40 114 5.2 41–45 314 14.3 46–50 461 21.0 51–55 539 24.6 56–60 476 21.7 61–65 242 11.0 Over 65 9 0.4 Experience as teacher [0–5] 72 3.3 [6–10] 93 4.2 [11–15] 117 5.3 [16–20] 222 10.1 [21–25] 469 21.4 [26–30] 477 21.8 [31–35] 454 20.7 [36–40] 224 10.2 Over 40 64 2.9 Qualification Bachelor’s Degree 46 2.1 Degree 1,431 65.3 Post-graduation 170 7.8 Master 482 22.0 PhD 63 2.9 Type of school State school 2,099 95.8 Private school 93 4.2 Missing 157 Pupils’socio-economic background High 56 2.6 Medium 1,454 66.3 Low 682 31.1 School location Urban 980 44.7 Sub-urban 789 36.0 Rural 423 19.3 Region in which the school is located North 1,048 47.8 Centre 558 25.5 Lisbon and Tejo Valley 329 15.0 Algarve 103 4.7 Autonomous Region of Madeira 62 2.8 Alentejo 59 2.7 Autonomous Region of Azores 33 1.5 Total 2,192 100.0 4 D. PEREIRA ET AL. (Flores, Machado et al., 2021). The survey included both open and closed-ended questions arranged in three sections. Section 1 is composed of 21 closed-ended questions focused on Remote Teaching Concerns experienced in the second lockdown. Section 2 includes 23 closed-ended questions aimed at comparing the remote teaching experience between the first and second lockdown. Section 3 includes the open-ended questions: (1) What were your main concerns during the period between the first and second lockdown?; (2) What was your teaching experience like during the second lockdown? (3) What was your main learning experience? (4) What are you going to change in your practice in the post-pandemic era? Lastly, sociodemographic questions included gender, age, teaching experience and teaching sector. To enhance the validity, sensitivity, and reliability in measuring a comparison of teaching concerns and experiences between the first and second lockdown, we developed two multi-item measures (Sommer & Sommer, 1997; Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007). The items in the survey were tried out for understanding and content validity with an appropriate group of practicing teachers, who provided written suggestions for improving item wording. After conducting content analysis on this material, we created 21 items that tap teachers’concerns regarding personal issues, students, and their families, working conditions and work-life balance and a further 23 items describing teachers’experience in terms of teaching strategies, assessment, technical conditions of remote teaching and collaborative work. The description and validation processes of the two questionnaires are described below. Both measures were developed in the Portuguese language. Remote Teaching Concerns in Pandemic Times (RTC) The original version of the questionnaire is composed of 21 items that reflect four themes emerging from the previous procedure described above. Teachers’concerns and challenges included issues related to themselves (sample item: Concerns about my health), students and their respective families (sample item: Concerns about students’emotional well-being), working conditions (sample item: Concerns about weak internet connection), and work-life balance (sample item: Concerns about how to separate work from family life). RTC instructions asked teachers to indicate the frequency of worrying about a number of professional and personal issues in the second phase of remote teaching (which in Portugal took place in March–April 2021). Answers followed a five Likert-type scale ranging from (1) ‘never’to (5) ‘always’. RTC validation. The 21 items were submitted to principal component analysis. Results indicate KMO value of .88 which is considered adequate for factorial analysis (Kaiser, 1974; Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007). Based on the criterion of eigenvalues greater than 1 and the examination of the scree plot (Stevens, 1992), a four-factor solution was submitted to varimax rotation. The solution obtained was considered meaningful and items with factor loadings equal or greater than .40 were retained. Only one item was excluded. The final instrument retained 20 items divided into four aspects. The total questionnaire accounted for 63% of the variance. The first factor ‘Personal issues’consisted of six items that accounted for 23% of the total variance. Items analysis suggest that this factor assesses teachers’concerns and challenges related to themselves and their family (e.g. Concern with my children’s mental health). The second factor ‘Students and their families’is composed of 6 items that accounted for 16% of the total variance. One sample item is Concern with students’learning. The third factor named ‘Working conditions’ consists of 5 items that accounted for 13%. One sample item is Difficult access to the computer. Finally, the fourth factor entitled ‘Work-life balance’accounted for 12% of the total variance and constitutes three items. This factor included items such as Not having a quiet place to work at home. To evaluate the internal consistency reliability of the Remote Teaching Concerns (RTC) in Pandemic Times, Cronbach0 Alpha was computed. RTC showed strong internal consistency reliability, with a Cronback Alpha of .96. This analysis was also undertaken for each factor separately and the results also showed good internal consistency reliability (Walsh & Betz, 1995) for all factors (F1 ¼.91, F2 ¼.84, F3 ¼.75, and F4 ¼.79). Factor scores were obtained by the sum of respective items divided by their number. Consequently, higher scores reflect higher frequency of Remote Teaching Concerns reported by teachers. Remote teaching experience in pandemic times (RTE). The original version of the questionnaire is composed of 23 items that reflect teachers’experience in terms of teaching, assessment, technical conditions, and collaborative work while engaged in remote teaching during the second lockdown. COGENT EDUCATION 5 RTE instructions asked participants to compare their remote teaching experience as compared to the first lockdown experience. Answers followed a five Likert-type scale ranging from (1) ‘totally disagree’to (5) ‘totally agree’. One sample item includes ‘I used more suitable teaching-learning strategies for remote learning’and ‘I felt less stressed about the student assessment process’. RTE validation. The 23 items were submitted to principal component analysis in the IBM SPSS program (v.26). Results indicate KMO value of .94 which is considered adequate for factorial analysis (Kaiser, 1974; Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007). Based on the criterion of eigenvalues greater than 1 and examination of the scree plot (Stevens, 1992), a four-factor solution was submitted to varimax rotation. The solution obtained was considered meaningful and items with factor loadings equal or greater than .40 were retained. The final instrument retained the 23 items distributed by four dimensions. The total questionnaire accounted for 60% of the variance. The first factor named ‘Teaching’consisted of nine items that accounted for 22% of the total variance. Items analysis suggest that this factor assesses more positive teaching experiences in the second lockdown than in the first (e.g. I adapted the moments and means to give feedback to the students in a more efficient and balanced way). The second factor concerns ‘Assessment’and is composed of eight items that accounted for 19% of the total variance. One sample item is There was greater articulation between teaching-learning objectives and assessment. The third factor named ‘Technical conditions of remote teaching’consists of three items that accounted for 10%. One sample item is There were less technical problems. Lastly, the fourth factor entitled ‘collaborative work’ accounted for 9% of the total variance and constitutes three items. This factor included items such as I developed more collaborative work with colleagues in my disciplinary group. The Remote Teaching Experiences in Pandemic Times (RTE) questionnaire showed strong internal consistency reliability (Cronback Alpha ¼.94). This analysis was also undertaken for each factor separately and the results also showed good internal consistency reliability (Walsh & Betz, 1995) for all factors (F1 ¼.90, F2 ¼.85, F3 ¼.75, and F4 ¼.70). Factor scores were obtained by the sum of respective items divided by their number. Consequently, higher scores reflect more positive teaching experience in the second lockdown as compared to the first. Data collection and ethical issues Data collection included information on the aims of the study and assurance of confidentiality was guaranteed. Participation in the study was entirely voluntary, and all participants were provided with clear, detailed information about the purpose of the research, its procedures, and their right to withdraw at any stage without any consequences. Informed consent was obtained prior to data collection, and participants were assured that their data would only be used for research purposes and kept confidential at all times. After providing informed consent the online questionnaire was disseminated. A link to the survey was created through Google forms and sent out to the teachers via the directors of the Teachers’ Professional Associations and Teachers’Unions with a request to forward it to associated teachers. Teachers from all sectors of education were invited. A non-probability convenience sample was used. The research project was carried out according to international educational research ethics standards, specifically concerning data confidentiality, informed consent, voluntary participation, and the use of data only for research purposes. The project was approved by the Ethics Committee for Research in Social and Human Sciences at the University of Minho (Ref. CEICSH 055/2020). Participants were informed about the goals of the project before giving their consent. The link to complete the questionnaire and the research protocol was sent to all participants, all of whom confirmed their voluntary informed consent to participate in the study. Anonymity was maintained by assigning unique, non-identifiable codes to all participants, ensuring that their responses could not be traced back to their identities. Any identifying information was excluded from the dataset and securely stored in compliance with data protection regulations. Data analysis procedures Data were analyzed with IBM SPSS Statistics v.26. Descriptive analysis was used to explore the teachers’ key concerns in the second moment of remote teaching (RQ1) and teachers’experience of the second lockdown in comparison to the first one (RQ2). To test gender differences (RQ1.1. and RQ2.1.) we ran 6 D. PEREIRA ET AL. two-sample independent T-tests. To explores differences across groups based on age group, teaching experience and teaching sector (RQ1.2., RQ1.3., RQ1.4., RQ2.2., RQ2.3. and RQ2.4.) data was analyzed with analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by post-hoc tests in the case of groups with more than two categories. Data collected through open-ended questions were analyzed through content analysis guided by the principles of completeness, representativeness, consistency, exclusivity and relevance (Bardin, 1977) and by recognizing the interactive nature of the data analysis process (Miles & Huberman, 1994). For content analysis, the definitions of more general categories were privileged (Bardin, 1977), articulating an inductive (emergent character of the data) (Cho & Lee, 2014) and a deductive perspective through the definition of categories in light of the research goals and theoretical framework (Ezzy, 2002). The categories of analysis were semantic (Miles & Huberman, 1994). Findings Remote Teaching Concerns (RTC) Remote Teaching Concerns (RTC) descriptives (mean and standard deviation) by total sample, gender, age group, teaching experience and teaching sector are presented in Table 2. Considering the total sample, the most frequent concerns reported by teachers relate to students and their families followed by personal issues. Two-sample independent T-tests were run to analyze differences in the four factors by gender. Results show a significant effect for gender in ‘Personal issues’[t(1401) ¼−2.83, p¼.005] and ‘Students and their families’[t(2013) ¼−4.80, p<.001], with women reporting higher levels of concern than men. However, there were no significant gender differences regarding concerns about ‘Working conditions’or ‘Work-life balance’[t(1766) ¼−.46, p¼.884; t(1629) ¼−1.60, p¼.110, respectively]. Analysis of variance showed differences by age group related to the frequency of concern with ‘Personal issues’[F(2,1400) ¼12.566; p<.001], ‘Working conditions’[F(2,1765) ¼10.396; p<.001] and ‘Work-life balance’[F(2,1628) ¼121.975; p<.001] but not with ‘Students and their families’[F(2,2012) ¼1.956; p¼.140]. Results from post-hoc comparisons suggest that concerns with personal issues and work-life balance differ among the three age groups and successively decrease with age. Additionally, concerns with working conditions are higher in the youngest age group than in the two older groups. Less experienced teachers reported the highest frequency of concerns with ‘Personal issues’[F(2,1400) ¼7.718; p<.001], ‘Working conditions’[F(2,1765) ¼19.855; p<.001] and ‘Work-life balance’[F(2,1628) ¼113.877; p<.001] but not with ‘Students and their families’ [F(2,2012) ¼.922; p¼.398]. Finally, ANOVA results suggest an effect of teaching sector in all factors, namely ‘Personal issues’[F(3,1281) ¼3.091; p¼.026], ‘Students and their families’[F(3,1843) ¼11.735; p<.001], ‘Working conditions’[F(3,1614) ¼8.396; p<.001] and ‘Work-life balance’[F(3,1495) ¼9.145; p<.001]. Post comparison tests show that secondary teachers reported the lowest level of concern compared with the other sectors. Table 2. Remote Teaching Concerns (RTC) descriptives by factors. Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 MSDMSDMSDMSD Total sample 3,46 1,01 3,64 0,72 2,28 0,79 2,69 1,07 Gender Male 3,30 1,09 3,48 0,73 2,27 0,83 2,60 1,08 Female 3,49 0,99 3,68 0,72 2,28 0,78 2,71 1,07 Age <46 3,66 0,92 3,63 0,71 2,42 0,76 3,34 0,99 46–55 3,46 1,00 3,62 0,74 2,27 0,80 2,66 1,03 >55 3,28 1,08 3,69 0,71 2,18 0,79 2,25 0,96 Teaching <26 3,57 0,96 3,62 0,74 2,40 0,79 3,08 1,04 Practice 26–35 3,37 1,04 3,67 0,70 2,18 0,77 2,43 1,00 in years >35 3,32 1,08 3,64 0,72 2,13 0,78 2,07 0,91 Teaching 1st cycle 3,58 0,94 3,78 0,71 2,42 0,76 2,82 1,08 Sector 2nd cycle 3,52 1,02 3,71 0,69 2,29 0,80 2,65 1,04 3th cycle 3,46 1,01 3,60 0,72 2,28 0,81 2,82 1,06 Secondary 3,35 1,06 3,52 0,72 2,15 0,74 2,49 1,06 Note. Factor 1¼Personal issues, Factor 2 ¼Students and their families, Factor 3 ¼Working conditions, and Factor 4 ¼Work-life balance. COGENT EDUCATION 7 According to teachers’open-ended responses, the most frequent concerns were also related to students and their families followed by personal issues. The lack of adequate working conditions and work life balance also emerged as concerns in teachers’responses. Students and their families Students’well-being was identified by teachers as a cause of great concern. Fragile emotional states, suicide attempts and the growing anxiety felt by students were identified by teachers as an aspect that made them feel uncomfortable. Particularly, the difficulties of some students to manage their emotions led to an increase in the number of students with anxiety and depression, even with regard to the possibility of having the disease (COVID-19). These issues had repercussions on students’well-being and on their learning and engagement. During this period, teachers were also faced with some constraints regarding their students and their families since the situation allowed them to get to know more closely the reality of many students’lives. Teachers essentially refer that they were sad and worried about the economic difficulties of students’families, particularly the poor living conditions in their homes, and the lack of basic necessities such as hygiene and food. One class director mentioned ‘I was concerned about the economic difficulties of the families of some students who were forced to appeal to the food baskets provided by the municipality’(T. 868). Teachers therefore report that the educational community mobilized to help hungry and needy families with regard to essential goods. Teachers also stated that they were worried since the economic/emotional difficulties that many families were going through meant that ‘many students in 12th grade class had to start working to help at home, arriving at classes clearly exhausted’(T. 1853). All of these issues had implications for students’support, parental control and supervision. Several teachers spoke of the lack of any kind of students’monitoring at home ‘both in terms of digital technology and in terms of meeting schedules and carrying out tasks’(T. 1373). In some cases, this lack of control was due to parents having to work with the result that ‘several students have to be left alone at home, at their mercy, due to the need for parents to go to work and older siblings having to take care of the younger ones’(T. 418). In some cases, in addition to the lack of parental supervision and failure to monitor children’s schooling during lockdown, teachers spoke of lack of parental authority ‘I’ve witnessed children giving orders to their parents and deliberately disobeying parental authority’(T. 644). However, in other cases, teachers identified parental negligence and behaviors that often disrupted the learning environment during online classes. They highlighted instances where some parents failed to provide adequate support for their children’s learning and, in certain situations, displayed disrespectful attitudes toward teachers’work. For example, teachers reported parents interfering directly in synchronous classes, providing answers to students, or engaging in irrelevant conversations during lessons. These behaviors not only undermined the teacher’s authority but also blurred the boundaries between home and school, creating additional challenges for maintaining an effective learning environment. The intrusion of parents during synchronous classes, giving answers to students and attempts at dialogue during classes on issues beyond the discipline of English and my task as a teacher. (T. 362) The negative attitudes of some parents in front of the computer allowed me to better understand the living conditions of some children and their relationship with their parents. (T. 1266) Students who already face significant challenges in face-to-face learning struggled even more with distance learning. Despite parents becoming aware of these difficulties, it was still difficult to convey the importance of attending synchronous classes, completing assigned tasks, and participating in support lessons. (T. 1410) It was challenging to manage some conflicts between parents and children in the middle of a synchronous lesson. I had to intervene, even from a distance. (T. 912) Finally, broken and dysfunctional families of some students deserved great attention and concern on the part of the teachers. Teachers observed that the attitudes and actions of some parents revealed deeper systemic issues, such as strained family relationships and unsuitable living conditions, which impacted students’ability to engage fully in their education. As teachers reported, There were family members attending classes and mouthing off to their children about the lesson, with the microphone switched off (especially in dysfunctional families with poorly educated people …). (T. 798) 8 D. PEREIRA ET AL. importance of simplifying bureaucratic procedures and establishing clearer guidelines for online teaching, including optimized scheduling and revised assessment criteria suited to digital environments. This aligns with findings from other studies, where teachers reported increased emotional exhaustion, experiencing the pandemic as particularly detrimental to their mental and emotional well-being (Elharake et al., 2023; Folkman et al., 2023; Tang, 2023). Other studies reveal that, compared to pre-pandemic conditions, teachers experienced a decline in well-being during the first lockdown in April 2020. However, by July 2020, teacher reports suggested a recovery in well-being as the school year ended (Kim et al., 2022). These results collectively highlight the dual pressures of administrative overload and emotional pressure, underscoring the need for structural reforms that address both workload management and the mental health of teachers. The pandemic also revealed significant gaps in teachers’digital competencies. While many teachers adapted to the shift to online teaching (Flores et al., 2024), the lack of formal training in digital pedagogy limited the effectiveness of their efforts (Beattie et al., 2022; Gonz alez et al., 2023; Teichert et al., 2023). Teachers expressed the need for training, particularly in using technology creatively in their teaching practices and designing digital assessments suited to online learning environments. In addition, there was broad support for exploring blended learning models that combine face-to-face and online activities. Teachers noted the flexibility these models offer allowing students to learn at their own pace while retaining essential in-person interactions. However, concerns were raised about the increased workload associated with such systems, especially without additional time for preparation and grading. This indicates that any move toward blended learning must be accompanied by structural changes, including adjustments to teacher workloads and support mechanisms, to ensure its sustainability and effectiveness. This finding is consistent with other studies suggesting that, in the post-pandemic context, institutions must develop comprehensive visions that provide support, clear structure, and a unified strategy to normalize blended learning and promote its sustained adoption (Hill & Smith, 2023). Teachers further noted that students often struggled with autonomy and self-management during distance learning, particularly younger learners. Other studies are also in line with this finding, noting that learner autonomy is vital in shaping students’experiences during distance education (Eberle & Hobrecht, 2021) closely linked to their personal traits and motivation to take responsibility for their learning. In distance learning contexts, innovative learner-centered approaches should be prioritized to foster autonomy (Fotiadou et al., 2017). There is a clear need to foster students’autonomous learning and ensure that virtual classroom tools effectively monitor engagement and maintain academic integrity. This highlights the importance of strategies that encourage student responsibility and robust monitoring systems in future distance learning scenarios, as institutional policies should strive to balance academic integrity with a positive experience for both students and teachers (Gribbins & Bonk, 2023). Fostering student autonomy in distance learning should be prioritized, with research examining how to use learner-centered approaches and technology to monitor engagement and maintain academic integrity. Finally, the well-being of both teachers and students was also of concern. The emotional toll of the pandemic, particularly during extended lockdowns, was considerable, with many educators reporting feelings of isolation, stress, and burnout. Similarly, students faced challenges in maintaining motivation and engagement without the regular structure and social interaction of the classroom. Teachers emphasized the need for policies that promote a better balance between work and personal life, as well as mental health support for teachers. Additionally, they pointed to the crucial role of family involvement in supporting students’emotional well-being and learning, underscoring that effective remote education requires strong collaboration between schools and families. The remote schooling period negatively affected both teachers and students in various aspects of teaching, learning, and well-being. Students’ learning experiences and peer interactions strongly influenced their well-being, while assessment design and teacher feedback were key factors in predicting teacher well-being (Burke et al., 2023). Our findings are consistent with this and other studies emphasizing the importance of incorporating elements related to personal well-being, both for students and teachers, into the broader assessment of educational quality (Klusmann et al., 2022; Woltran et al., 2021). COGENT EDUCATION 15 Implications for research, policy, and practice Finally, this study provides implications for research, policy, and practice. In terms of research, there is a need to investigate teachers’experiences throughout the pandemic that can provide valuable insights into how to support and retain teachers in the future. Research can also explore the effectiveness of different teaching methods during the pandemic and identify best practices for hybrid and remote learning. Additionally, this study underlines the need for further exploration of the specific challenges teachers encounter during remote teaching, especially across diverse contexts, including various educational sectors and demographic groups (such as urban vs. rural areas, public vs. private schools, or varying age groups). Such insights would help create tailored solutions for different settings and ensure that all teachers and students receive the necessary support to overcome technological and pedagogical barriers. Future studies could investigate the long-term effects of these experiences on teaching practices and teacher well-being as well as the changes that have occurred in the post-pandemic context. As for policy, there is a need to address the challenges that teachers faced during the pandemic, including increased workload, lack of resources, and lack of support. Policies that provide financial and material resources, mental health support, and professional development opportunities can help reduce these challenges and support teachers in their efforts to provide quality education to their students. Policymakers can also consider flexible work arrangements, such as reduced work hours or job-sharing, to support teachers’work-life balance. An investment in education and the professionalism of teachers to address these constraints are required in the future (Phillips et al., 2024) as well as the fact that discourse on curriculum should be central to the post-COVID-19 agenda in view of teacher education, and in teaching in general (Biberman-Shalev et al., 2023). The future of teaching in the post-COVID-19 context will involve increased utilization of virtual and digital learning within traditional in-person school settings, based on a transition toward hybrid models of curriculum delivery and new virtual modes of professional collaboration (Hargreaves, 2021). Thus, given the significant increase in remote and hybrid teaching, it is crucial that educational policies invest in ongoing professional development programs for teachers, focusing on digital skills as well as adaptive pedagogies for online teaching. Additionally, students should receive deeper, more contextualized training in the use of digital tools to ensure they can fully benefit from technology in the learning process. As far as practice is concerned, there is a need to develop strategies that support teachers’and students’well-being (Klusmann et al., 2022), which is in line with a current trend in education based on a shift away from solely prioritizing learning outcomes as the sole indicator of high-quality education. Instead, there is a growing recognition of the importance of incorporating aspects such as personal well-being, both for students and teachers, into the evaluation of educational quality (Elharake et al., 2023; Folkman et al., 2023; Woltran et al., 2021). Teachers also need access to adequate technology and resources to facilitate effective teaching and learning. School leaders can support teachers by providing access to resources and technology, creating a supportive and collaborative work environment, and providing training in digital technologies for parents, teachers and pupils (Beattie et al., 2022). Moreover, there is a need to review educational curricula to ensure they are more flexible and suitable for the new realities of hybrid and digital learning. This involves reimagining how content is delivered and how assessments are conducted, promoting an approach that prioritizes student-centered learning and competency acquisition rather than just content coverage. Schools should be encouraged to adopt a more interdisciplinary and integrated approach, allowing for more fluid and adaptable learning to meet the individual needs of students. Understanding the concerns and teaching experience of teachers during the pandemic is crucial for research, policy, and practice. By addressing the challenges faced by teachers during the pandemic, policymakers and school leaders can better support teachers and provide quality education to students. It is clear that reflective practices and collaboration among educators play a vital role in improving crisis responses. This aligns with Manca and Delfino’s(2021) findings, which emphasize the importance of leveraging favorable preexisting conditions and fostering a strong shared school culture to enable prompt and effective reactions to an unexpected situation. Nonetheless, the future of teaching after COVID-19 will be complex, uncertain, and contingent on policy decisions and professional directions (Hargreaves, 2021). Attention needs to be given to opportunities to prepare the way for teachers to explore 16 D. PEREIRA ET AL. innovative methods of promoting successful instructional delivery in the times to come (Cahapay & Anoba, 2020). It is essential to initiate a curriculum-based structural shift while reimagining pedagogical methods within the realm of post-COVID-19 education (Biberman-Shalev et al., 2023). By embracing these challenges and changes, teachers will not only enhance their teaching practices but also create a more resilient and adaptive framework that addresses the evolving needs of students as well as their own needs. Disclosure statement No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s). Funding This work was financially supported by Portuguese national funds through the FCT (Foundation for Science and Technology) within the framework of the CIEC (Research Center on Child Studies of the University of Minho) projects. About the authors Diana Pereira holds a PhD in Educational Sciences –Curricular Development by the University of Minho/European PhD (Malardalen University, Sweden) and a Masters Degree in Educational Sciences –specialization in Evaluation by the University of Minho. She has published your work in international journals with impact factor and is member of national and international projects, mainly in the area of Educational Sciences. Her research interests include assessment, learning and teaching process, feedback, curriculum development, educational leadership, educational policies and higher education. Diana Aguiar Vieira PhD is a psychologist, Associate Professor with aggregation (T ıtulo de agregado) who teaches behavioural sciences at the Porto Accounting and Business School (ISCAP), Polytechnic Institute of Porto (P.PORTO), Portugal. and researcher at the Centre for Organizational and Social Studies Polytechnic Institute of Porto (P.PORTO), Portugal. Former Vice-Dean of Porto Accounting and Business School (ISCAP). Founder and coordinator of the Coaching, Career and Personal Development Unit (2011-2018) and the Alumni Office (2012-2018), both at ISCAP. Former Pro-Rector of P.PORTO for Employability and Alumni Strategy. Founder of the ICAReAlumni International Conference & Community (https://icarealumni.com/). Her research interests include alumni relations, career development, employability, coaching, higher education, soft skills, self-efficacy and Social Cognitive Theory. She has been involved in international research projects and partnerships with European and Brazilian universities. Maria Assunc¸~ ao Flores works at the University of Minho, Portugal. She received her PhD in Education in 2002 at the University of Nottingham, UK. Her research interests include teacher professionalism and identity, teacher education and professional development, curriculum and assessment, leadership, and higher education. She has published extensively on these topics both nationally and internationally. She is currently director of the Research Center on Child Studies at the University of Minho. She is also a member of the Board of the Teacher Education Policy in Europe network and of the International Forum for Teacher Educator Development. Eus ebio Andr e Machado has a degree in Philosophy from the University of Porto, a Master’s in Philosophy of Education and a PhD in Education from the University of Minho. He also completed an European Diploma of Advanced Studies at the Universit e Pierre Mend es France (Grenoble). He is currently doing a Post-Doctorate in Educational Sciences at the Institute of Education of the University of Minho. He is a Staff Teacher at Agrupamento Tomaz Pelayo (Santo Tirso) and a Visiting Assistant Professor at Universidade Portucalense (Porto), where he co-ordinated the PhD in Education and the Masters in Education Administration and Management. He is also a researcher at the Research Centre for Child Studies at the University of Minho. Since 2008, he has worked with the Ministry of Education’s Directorate-General for School Administration on teacher training and training evaluation. He is a trainer for the Pestalozzi Programme of the Council of Europe (Strasbourg). He is currently a member of the Board of Directors of ADMEE-Europe representing Portugal, President of the Scientific Council of the National Association of Teachers and a member of the Santo Tirso Municipal Education Council. He is the coordinator of the Integra Centre - Local Integrated Support Centre for the Promotion of School Success in the municipality of Santo Tirso. He is the author and co-author of several books and scientific articles in the field of education, particularly in the areas of assessment, teacher training, supervision and educational policies. Eva Fernandes is a Junior Researcher at Research Center on Child Studies at the Institute of Education of the University of Minho, Portugal. She completed her PhD in Educational Sciences, Specialization in Curriculum Development in the same university. Her research interests are assessment, compulsory education, teacher COGENT EDUCATION 17 education, teachers’work and professional development, pupil voice, teacher leadership, and higher education. She has published papers in peer-reviewed scientific journals and participated in national and international research projects. ORCID Diana Pereira http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3550-1855 References Alves, R., Lopes, T., & Precioso, J. (2020). Teachers’well-being in times of Covid-19 pandemic: Factors that explain professional well-being. IJERI: International Journal of Educational Research and Innovation,15(15), 203–217. https://doi.org/10.46661/ijeri.5120 Anderson, R., Bousselot, T., Katz-Buoincontro, J., & Todd, J. (2020). Generating buoyancy in a sea of uncertainty: Teachers creativity and well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. Frontiers in Psychology,11, 614774. https://doi. org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.614774 Anggadwita, G., Indarti, N., & Ratten, V. (2024). Changes in Indonesian private universities educational practices in the post COVID-19 environment. The International Journal of Management Education,22(1), 100905. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.ijme.2023.100905 Auger, G., & Formentin, M. (2021). This is depressing: The emotional labor of teaching during the pandemic spring 2020. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator,76(4), 376–393. https://doi.org/10.1177/10776958211012900  Avalos, B., Flores, M. A., & Araneda, S. (2022). Battling to keep education going: Chilean and Portuguese teacher experiences in COVID-19 times. Teachers and Teaching,28(2), 131–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2021. 2012758 Bardin, L. (1977). An alise de conte udo. Edic¸~ oes 70. Beattie, M., Wilson, C., & Hendry, G. (2022). Learning from lockdown: Examining Scottish primary teachers’experiences of emergency remote teaching. British Journal of Educational Studies,70(2), 217–234. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 00071005.2021.1915958 Biberman-Shalev, L., Broza, O., & Chamo, N. (2023). Contextual changes and shifts in pedagogical paradigms: PostCOVID-19 Blended learning as a negotiation space in teacher education. Education Sciences,13(3), 275. https://doi. org/10.3390/educsci13030275 Burke, P. F., Schuck, S., & Kearney, M. (2023). Teachers’experiences of emergency remote schooling during the pandemic: Drivers for student and teacher wellbeing. Australian Journal of Education,67(2), 124–142. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/00049441231159666 Cahapay, M., & Anoba, J. (2020). The readiness of teachers on blended learning transition for post COVID-19 period: An assessment using parallel mixed method. PUPIL: International Journal of Teaching, Education and Learning,4(2), 295–316. https://doi.org/10.20319/pijtel.2020.42.295316 Chan, M., Sharkey, J. D., Lawrie, S. I., Arch, D. A. N., & Nylund-Gibson, K. (2021). Elementary school teacher well-being and supportive measures amid COVID-19: An exploratory study. School Psychology (Washington, D.C.),36(6), 533– 545. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000441 Cho, J. Y., & Lee, E. (2014). Reducing confusion about grounded theory and qualitative content analysis: Similarities and differences. The Qualitative Report,19,1–20. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2014.1028 Clark, S., McGrane, A., Boyle, N., Joksimovic, N., Burke, L., Rock, N., & O’Sullivan, K. (2021). You’re a teacher you’re a mother, you’re a worker: Gender inequality during COVID-19 in Ireland. Gender, Work & Organization,28(4), 1352– 1362. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12611 Conrad, C., Deng, Q., Caron, I., Shkurska, O., Skerrett, P., & Sundararajan, B. (2022). How student perceptions about online learning difficulty influenced their satisfaction during Canada’s Covid-19 response. British Journal of Educational Technology: Journal of the Council for Educational Technology,53(3), 534–557. https://doi.org/10.1111/ bjet.13206 Dissanayeke, S. R., Lewis, R., & Swindells, S. (2024). Designing an innovative digital group work assignment to foster employability: An adaptable hybrid approach for the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning,39(2), 132–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2024.2307623 Dempsey, T., & Mestry, R. (2023). Teachers’perceptions and experiences of navigating continuing professional development during the COVID-19 pandemic. Education Sciences,13(9), 933. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13090933 Di Pietro, G. (2023). The impact of Covid-19 on student achievement: Evidence from a recent meta-analysis. Educational Research Review,39, 100530. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100530 Eberle, J., & Hobrecht, J. (2021). The lonely struggle with autonomy: A case study of first-year university students’ experiences during emergency online teaching. Computers in Human Behavior,121, 106804. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.chb.2021.106804 18 D. PEREIRA ET AL. Elharake, J. A., Akbar, F., Malik, A. A., Gilliam, W., & Omer, S. B. (2023). Mental health impact of COVID-19 among children and college students: A systematic review. Child Psychiatry and Human Development,54(3), 913–925. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s10578-021-01297-1 Ezzy, D. (2002). Qualitative analysis, practice and innovation. Routledge. Flores, M. A., Machado, E. A., Alves, P., & Vieira, D. A. (2021). Ensinar em tempos de COVID-19: um estudo com professores dos ensinos b asico e secund ario em Portugal. Revista Portuguesa de Educac¸~ ao,34(1), 5–27. https://doi. org/10.21814/rpe.21108 Flores, M. A., Barros, A., Veiga Sim~ ao, A. M., Pereira, D., Gago, M., Fernandes, E. L., Ferreira, P., & Costa, L. (2024). Remote teaching in times of COVID-19: Teachers’adaptation and pupil level of participation. Technology, Pedagogy and Education,33(1), 57–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2023.2270491 Flores, M. A., Barros, A., Veiga Sim~ ao, A. M., Gago, M., Fernandes, E. L., Pereira, D., Ferreira, P. C., & Costa, L. (2021). Ensino remoto de emerg^ encia em tempos de pandemia: A experi^ encia de professores portugueses. Revista Portuguesa de Investigac¸~ ao Educacional,21,1–26. Folkman, A. K., Josefsson, K. A., & Fjetland, K. J. (2023). Norwegian teachers’experiences with distance teaching and online schooling during the COVID-19 pandemic. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research,67(3), 447–462. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2021.2021445 Fotiadou, A., Angelaki, C., & Mavroidis, I. (2017). Learner autonomy as a factor of the learning process in distance education. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning,20(1), 96–111. https://doi.org/10.1515/eurodl-20170006 Francom, G. M., Lee, S. J., & Pinkney, H. (2021). Technologies, challenges and needs of K-12 teachers in the transition to distance learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. TechTrends: For Leaders in Education & Training,65(4), 589– 601. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-021 Gillani, A., Dierst-Davies, R., Lee, S., Robin, L., Li, J., Glover-Kudon, R., Baker, K., & Whitton, A. (2022). Teachers’dissatisfaction during the COVID-19 pandemic: Factors contributing to a desire to leave the profession. Frontiers in Psychology,13, 940718. DOI¼https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.940718 Gonz alez, C., Ponce, D., & Fern andez, V. (2023). Teachers’experiences of teaching online during COVID-19: Implications for postpandemic professional development. Educational Technology Research and Development: ETR &D,71(1), 55–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10200-9 Gribbins, M., & Bonk, C. (2023). An exploration of instructors’perceptions about online proctoring and its value in ensuring academic integrity. British Journal of Educational Technology,54(6), 1693–1714. https://doi.org/10.1111/ bjet.13389 Hargreaves, A. (2021). What the COVID-19 pandemic has taught us about teachers and teaching. FACETS,6, 1835– 1863. https://doi.org/10.1139/facets-2021-0084 Hass, D., Hass, A., & Joseph, M. (2023). Emergency online learning & the digital divide: An exploratory study of the effects of covid-19 on minority students. Marketing Education Review,33(1), 22–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 10528008.2022.2136498 Heikkil€ a, M., & Mankki, V. (2023). Teachers’agency during the Covid-19 lockdown: A new materialist perspective. Pedagogy, Culture & Society,31(5), 989–1004. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2021.1984285 Henriques, S., Correia, J. D., & Dias-Trindade, S. (2021). Portuguese primary and secondary education in times of COVID-19 pandemic: An exploratory study on teacher training and challenges. Education Sciences,11(9), 542. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11090542 Hill, J., & Smith, K. (2023). Visions of blended learning: Identifying the challenges and opportunities in shaping institutional approaches to blended learning in higher education. Technology, Pedagogy and Education,32(3), 289– 303. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2023.2176916 Judd, J., Rember, B., Pellegrini, T., Ludlow, B., & Meisner, J. (2020). This is not teaching?: The effects of COVID-19 on teachers.https://www.socialpublishersfoundation.org/knowledge_base/this-is-not-teaching-the-effects-of-covid-19on-teachers/ Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika,39(1), 31–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02291575 Kamaludin, K., & Sundarasen, S. (2023). COVID-19 and online distance learning in Malaysia: A blessing or a curse? Frontiers in Education,8, 1062219. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1062219 Kim, L., & Asbury, K. (2020). I ‘Like a rug had been pulled from under you’: The impact of COVID-19 on teachers in England during the first six weeks of the UK lockdown. The British Journal of Educational Psychology,90(4), 1062– 1083. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12381 Kim, L. E., Oxley, L., & Asbury, K. (2022). My brain feels like a browser with 100 tabs open: A longitudinal study of teachers’mental health and well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(1), 299–318. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12450 Klapproth, F., Federkeil, L., Heinschke, F., & Jungmann, T. (2020). Teachers experiences of stress and their coping strategies during COVID - 19 induced distance teaching. Journal of Pedagogical Research,4(4), 444–452. https:// doi.org/10.33902/JPR.2020062805 Klusmann, B., Trippenzee, M., Fokkens-Bruinsma, M., Sanderman, R., & Schroevers, M. (2022). Providing emergency remote teaching: What are teachers’needs and what could have helped them to deal with the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic? Teaching and Teacher Education,118, 103815. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103815 COGENT EDUCATION 19 Kupers, E., Mouw, J., & Fokkens-Bruinsma, M. (2022). Teaching in times of COVID-19: A mixed-method study into teachers’teaching practices, psychological needs, stress, and well-being. Teaching and Teacher Education,115, 103724. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103724 Leo, A., Holdsworth, E., Wilcox, K., Khan, M.,  Avila, J., & Tobin, J. (2022). Gendered impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic: A mixed-method study of teacher stress and work-life balance. Community. Work & Family,25(5), 682–703. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668803.2022.2124905 Maldonado, J. A., & De Witt, K. (2022). The effect of school closures on standardized student test outcomes. British Educational Research Journal,48(1), 49–94. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3754 Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded source book (2nd ed). Sage. https://doi. org/10.1177/0095399717747655 Manca, S., & Delfino, M. (2021). Adapting educational practices in emergency remote education: Continuity and change from a student perspective. British Journal of Educational Technology,52(4), 1394–1413. https://doi.org/10. 1111/bjet.13098 NFER. (2020). Schools’responses to Covid-19. Pupil engagement in remote learning.https://www.nfer.ac.uk/schoolsresponses-to-covid-19-pupil-engagement-in-remote-learning Phillips, L., Cain, M., Ritchie, J., Campbell, C., Davis, S., Brock, C., Burke, G., Coleman, K., & Joosa, E. (2024). Surveying and resonating with teacher concerns during COVID-19 pandemic. Teachers and Teaching,30(7–8), 900–917. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2021.1982691 Prado-Gasc o, V., G omez-Dom ınguez, M. T., Soto-Rubio, A., D ıaz-Rodr ıguez, L., & Navarro-Mateu, D. (2020). Stay at home and teach: A comparative study of psychosocial risks between Spain and Mexico during the pandemic. Frontiers in Psychology,11, 566900. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.566900 Rawal, D. (2023). Work life balance among female school teachers delivering online curriculum in Bandgaon block during COVID-19: An empirical study. Management in Education,37(1), 37–45. https://doi.org/10.55927/ijabm.v2i1. 2893 Robinson, L. E., Valido, A., Drescher, A., Woolweaver, A. B., Espelage, D. L., LoMurray, S., Long, A. C. J., Wright, A. A., & Dailey, M. M. (2023). Teachers, stress, and the COVID-19 pandemic: A qualitative analysis. School Mental Health, 15(1), 78–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-022-09533-2 Roy, G., Babu, R., Abul Kalam, M., Yasmin, N., Zafar, T., & Nath, S. R. (2023). Response, readiness and challenges of online teaching amid COVID-19 pandemic: The case of higher education in Bangladesh. Educational and Developmental Psychologist,40(1), 40–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/20590776.2021.1997066 Scull, J., Phillips, M., Sharma, U., & Garnier, K. (2020). Innovations in teacher education at the time of COVID19: an Australian perspective. Journal of Education for Teaching,46(4), 497–506. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2020. 1802701 Sommer, B. B., & Sommer, R. (1997). A practical guide to behavioral research: Tools and techniques. Oxford University Press. Stevens, J. (1992). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics. Pearson Education. Tang, K. H. D. (2023). Impacts of COVID-19 on primary, secondary and tertiary education: A comprehensive review and recommendations for educational practices. Educational Research for Policy and Practice,22(1), 23–61. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s10671-022-09319-y Teichert, L., Piazza, S., & Hinga, J. (2023). Teachers’digital pedagogies and experiences in virtual classrooms. Improving Schools,26(1), 54–69. https://doi.org/10.1177/13654802231175398 € Unal, I., & Dulay, S. (2022). Teachers’work-life balance in emergency remote teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic. Asian Journal of Distance Education,17(2), 89–108. http://www.asianjde.com/ojs/index.php/AsianJDE/article/view/657 Walsh, W. B., & Betz, N. E. (1995). Tests and assessment. Prentice-Hall, Inc. Wharton-Beck, A., Chou, C. C., Gilbert, C., Johnson, B., & Beck, M. A. (2024). K-12 school leadership perspectives from the COVID-19 pandemic. Policy Futures in Education,22(1), 21–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/14782103221135620 Woltran, F., Chan, R., Lindner, K., & Schwab, S. (2021). Austrian elementary school teachers’during emergency distance teaching. Frontiers in Education,6, 759541. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.759541 Yakimova, S., Chernova, O., Burovkina, L., Prishchepa, A., Ponomarenko, E., & Altunina, J. (2023). M etodos de avaliac¸~ ao de aprendizagem remota implementados durante a COVID-19: Uma revis~ ao abrangente. Revista on Line de Pol ıtica e Gest~ ao Educacional,27, e023059. https://doi.org/10.22633/rpge.v27i00.18529 20 D. PEREIRA ET AL.