"At what point in your journey as a student and/or teacher were you, at the beginning of 2020?" 

I was starting what would be my last year of a Bachelor's degree in Education Sciences. I had already chosen to take classes at night because it fit my schedule better, and I was prepared to continue that way for the year. But suddenly, everyone's routine changed, and so did the classes. 

"What changed in the classes that you gave as a teacher? What changed in the classes that you took as a student?" 

Personally, I remember that just as in face-to-face teaching, the teaching modalities, use of resources, and even the way of connecting with us varied among different teachers; these differences were likewise manifest and reflected in the virtual environments.

"What were the impressions of university teachers in the new teaching scenario? To what extent were they capable of incorporating new tools? How did they maintain their links with their students? How did they modify their teaching practice given the new context?"

A group of researchers from universities in Latin America, the United States, Europe and Israel launched a study that would examine the impact that the shift from face-to-face classes to virtual environments would have on modes of teaching. Anyone involved in any way in the realm of education knows that the COVID-19 context prompted modifications in the modalities of teaching and learning. At all levels of all educational institutions, the challenge of adapting to online education was a real one. Teachers found themselves in a new scenario that required each of them to have specific knowledge and skills.

The research sought to outline and classify this impact in accordance with the teacher profiles identified through the journey they made. Thus, the third article, presented here, written by researchers Marcelo Dorfsman and Gabriel Horenczyk and developing part of the results, is called "Experienced, Enthusiastic and Cautious: Pedagogy Profiles in Emergency and Post-Emergency.” [1]

Several studies have been carried out concerning the changes that had to be made in the field of education; what the repercussions were, both for teachers and students; and what the consequences were, at the academic and social level of each of the actors involved in the pandemic context. These questions are still being investigated today. The innovative idea suggested by Dorfsman and Horenczyk is that the most important point when developing this type of research, which involves lengthy processes in which a large volume of information is collected, is to be able to "ask what we have learned in the last two years, and how we should build a new pedagogy that includes new tools and concepts that can help us navigate future emergencies" (p.3).

The article was written in a post-emergency context, where most universities had already returned to face-to-face instruction. Through a selection process, 15 professors from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem were interviewed. The following topics were covered: the teaching journey; teaching methodology (including planning, resources used, etc.); the impact of online teaching on your practice; and institutional perspective (how did you feel in your practice about the organization in which you teach).

In the first stage, after the survey was carried out, three different profiles of teachers were identified: enthusiastic, experienced, and cautious. In addition, their level of digital literacy, teaching approach, and willingness to undergo pedagogical changes was considered. The results were integrated with the categorization of the teachers in accordance with these three profiles.

In the next stage of the research, reflected in this third article, we sought to answer the question: Is it possible to identify a relationship between the various teacher profiles in an emergency situation and the willingness of each one to incorporate new pedagogical practices adapted to the new environment of virtual teaching? Answering this question requiring delving into the pedagogical strategies each of the teachers interviewed used and their orientation or focus. This last element is fascinating since, given the particular and surprising context in which educators found themselves at the beginning of the pandemic, each one reacted in a different way and had a different focus. For example, some decided to prioritize having all their students connected to the Zoom session and turning their screens on, while others chose to prioritize content and to hold the classes regardless of the level of student participation. Likewise, while some incorporated digital tools that they already knew how to use into their classes, others put their energies into learning how to use new ones.

Thus, the results include analysis of pedagogical planning, methodologies, extent of teamwork, and consideration of the needs of the students.

One of the exciting ideas that emerge from the study is the need to "normalize a post-pandemic pedagogy, in which online teaching is part of a new normalization of emergency online learning, which refers to strategies that frame the adoption widespread use of online learning under COVID-19 as a pathway to a new normal rather than an emergency response" (Dorfsman & Horenczyk, p. 3, 2022). This should be a key perspective in the framing of research that has been done to analyze aspects of education in the context of a pandemic. We must identify those elements that have "come to stay" and from which we can learn. On the other hand, the teacher profiles that have been presented can help identify the specific training and support for teachers that should be promoted.

  [1] Dorfsman, M., & Horenczyk, G. (2022). “Experienced, Enthusiastic and Cautious: Pedagogy Profiles in Emergency and Post-Emergency.” Education Sciences, 12(11), 756.