The teaching and learning process is facing many unprecedented challenges that require innovative solutions in the short life of knowledge and the abrupt development of technology. Some of these challenges are the new roles of teachers who are the main constituents in the online teaching process. The main aim of this study revolved around determining and analyzing university students' priorities concerning the competency categorization and roles of online teachers. The research was based on Moodle and Google classroom to validate the competency elements with the final aim of improving teaching and learning processes. The data were collected by using an online questionnaire that evaluated eight dimensions of competencies and roles of online teachers. The research sample consisted of 430 participants (aged between 19 and 30) from Iraq and Oman. The results obtained from these two countries were very similar as the respondents highlighted professional, pedagogical and social competencies in their teachers. It further shows that though the applications used in the two contexts were different (Google classroom with Google Meet or Moodle), it did not affect the final results gained. The results of this survey could be important for further analysis of online teaching practice and bring several important insights regarding the possibilities of online teaching.

Department of Applied Linguistics Faculty of Informatics and Management University of Hradec Králové Hradec Králové Czechia

Department of English College of Education for Human Sciences University of Diyala Baqubah Iraq

Department of Information Technology Al Buraimi University College Al Buraimi Oman

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Abdous M. H. (2011). A process-oriented framework for acquiring online teaching competencies. J. Comput. High. Educ. 23, 60–77. doi: 10.1007/s12528-010-9040-5 DOI

Albrahim F. A. (2020). Online teaching skills and competencies. TOJET 19, 9–20.

AlFarsi G., Hidayah S., Tawafak R. M., Malik S. I., Jabbar J., Eldaw A., et al. . (2021a). The principles of designing an expert system in teaching mathematics. In AIP Conference Proceedings 2339, 020078), AIP Publishing LLC.

AlFarsi G., Tawafak R. M., ElDow A., Malik S. I., Jabbar J., Al Sideiri A. (2021). “Smart classroom technology in artificial intelligence: A review paper.” in International Conference on Culture Heritage, Education, Sustainable Tourism, and Innovation Technologies. 229–235.

Alman S. W., Tomer C., Lincoln M. L. (2012). Designing online learning: A primer for librarians. Retrieved from http://publisher.abc-clio.com/9781598846386

Al-Obaydi L. H. (2019). Cultural diversity, awareness and teaching: a study in an EFL context. J. Asia TEFL 16, 987–995. doi: 10.18823/asiatefl.2019.16.3.15.987 DOI

Al-Obaydi L. H. (2020). Using virtual learning environment as a medium of instruction in EFL context: college teachers’ attitudes. Intensive J. 3

Al-Obaydi L. H. (2021). Humanistic learning elements in a blended learning environment: a study in an EFL teaching context. Interact. Learn. Environ. 29, 1–14. doi: 10.1080/10494820.2021.1919717 DOI

Autret B., Mary B., Chenu C., Balabane M., Girardin C., Bertrand M., et al. . (2016). Alternative arable cropping systems: a key to increase soil organic carbon storage? Results from a 16 year field experiment. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 232, 150–164.

Baran E., Correia A. P. (2014). A professional development framework for online teaching. Tech Trends 58, 95–101. doi: 10.1007/s11528-014-0791-0 DOI

Bawane J., Spector M. (2009). Prioritization of online instructor roles: implications for competency-based teacher education programs. Distance Educ. 30, 383–397. doi: 10.1080/01587910903236536 DOI

Çakmak F., Namaziandost E., Kumar T. (2021). CALL-enhanced L2 vocabulary learning: using spaced exposure through CALL to enhance L2 vocabulary retention. Educ. Res. Int. 2021, 1–8. doi: 10.1155/2021/5848525 DOI

Chehayeb K. M., Lienhard J. H. (2015). Effect of feed salinity on the performance of humidification dehumidification desalination.

Collins A., Halverson R. (2010). The second educational revolution: rethinking education in the age of technology. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 26, 18–27. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2009.00339.x DOI

Debes G. (2021). Distance learning in higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic: advantages and disadvantages. Int. J. Curr. Instr. 13, 1109–1118. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2022.822958 DOI

Dennis B., Watland P., Pirotte S., Verday N. (2004). Roles and competencies of the e-tutor. In Proceedings of the Networked Learning Conference 2004

Derakhshan A. (2021). Emergence distance education (EDE) role in the learning of English language skills during COVID-19 pandemic. J. Teach. Lang. Skills 40, 41–82. doi: 10.22099/jtls.2021.39849.2948 DOI

Derakhshesh A., Fathi J., Hosseini H. M., Mehraein S. (2022). An investigation of the structural model of online course satisfaction, online learning self-efficacy, and online learning climate in the EFL context. CALL-EJ 23:2022, 261–281.

Engelbrecht E. (2003). A look at e-learning models: investigating their value for developing an e-learning strategy. Progressio 25, 38–47.

Facer K. (2011). Learning Futures: Education, Technology and Social Change. New York, NY: Routledge.

Goold A., Coldwell J., Craig A. (2010). An examination of the role of the e-tutor. Australas. J. Educ. Technol. 26, 704–716. doi: 10.14742/ajet.1060 DOI

Guasch T., Alvarez I., Espasa A. (2010). University teacher competencies in a virtual teaching/learning environment: analysis of a teacher training experience. Teach. Teach. Educ. 26, 199–206. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2009.02.018 DOI

Hafsa S., Majid M. A., Tawafak R. M. (2021). Learnability factors of AR usage performance: validating through survey. In 2021 International Conference on Software Engineering & Computer Systems and 4th International Conference on Computational Science and Information Management (ICSECS-ICOCSIM) 371–376. IEEE.

Howland J. L., Jonassen D., Marra R. M. (2012). Meaningful Learning with Technology (4th). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Ifinedo P., Pyke J., Anwar A. (2018). Business undergraduates’ perceived use outcomes of Moodle in a blended learning environment: the roles of usability factors and external support. Telematics Inform. 35, 93–102. doi: 10.1016/j.tele.2017.10.001 DOI

Janzen M. (2014). Hot Team: Google Classroom. State College: The Pennsylvania State University.

Keeler J. F., Pretsell D. O., Robbins T. W. (2014). Functional implications of dopamine D1 vs. D2 receptors: A `prepare and select’model of the striatal direct vs. indirect pathways. Neuroscience 282, 156–175. PubMed

Klein J. M., Spector J. M., Grabowski B., de la Teja I. (2004). Instructor Competencies: Standards for Face-to-Face, Online, and Blended Settings. Greenwich, CT: Information Age.

Kompri M. (2015). Manajemen Pendidikan 1. Bandung: Alfabeta.

Macdonald G., Hursh D. (2006). Twenty-First Century Schools: Knowledge, Networks and New Economies. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publication.

MacDonald C. J., Stodel E. J., Farres L. G., Breithaupt K., Gabriel M. A. (2001). The demand-driven learning model: a framework for web-based learning. Internet High. Educ. 4, 9–30. doi: 10.1016/S1096-7516(01)00045-8 DOI

Munoz Carril P. C., Gonzalez Sanmamed M., Hernandez Selles N. (2013). Pedagogical roles and competencies of university teachers practicing in the elearning environment. Int. Rev. Res. Open Dist. Learn. 14, 462–487. doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v14i3.1477 DOI

Palloff R. M., Pratt K. (2011). The excellent online instructor: Strategies for professional development. San Franscisco: Jossy Bass.

Pikhart M., Al-Obaydi L. H., Abdur Rehman M. (2022). A quantitative analysis of the students’ experience with digital media in L2 acquisition. Psycholinguistics 31, 118–140. doi: 10.31470/2309-1797-2022-31-1-118-140 DOI

Pikhart M., Klímová B. (2019). Utilization of linguistic aspects of Bloom's taxonomy in blended learning. Educ. Sci. 9:235. doi: 10.3390/educsci9030235 DOI

Pikhart M., Klímová B. (2020). eLearning 4.0 as a sustainability strategy for generation Z language learners: applied linguistics of second language acquisition in younger adults. Societies 10:38. doi: 10.3390/soc10020038 DOI

Pishghadam R., Derakhshan A., Zhaleh K., Al-Obaydi L. H. (2021). Students’ willingness to attend EFL classes with respect to teachers’ credibility, stroke, and success: a cross-cultural study of Iranian and Iraqi students’ perceptions. Curr. Psychol. 40, 1–15. doi: 10.1007/s12144-021-01738-z DOI

Rad H. S., Namaziandost E., Razmi M. H. (2022). Integrating STAD and flipped learning in expository writing skills: impacts on students’ achievement and perceptions. J. Res. Technol. Educ., 1–17. doi: 10.1080/15391523.2022.2030265 DOI

Richey R. C., Fields D. C., Foxon M., Roberts R. C., Spannaus T., Spector J. M. (2005). Instructional Design Competencies: The Standards (3rd). New York: International Board of Standards for Training, Performance and Instruction (IBSTPI).

Russell V., Murphy-Judy K. (2020). Teaching Language Online: A Guide to Designing, Developing, and Delivering Online, Blended, and Flipped Language Courses. New York: Routledge.

Salmon G. (2003). E-moderating: The key to teaching and learning online. Psychology Press.

Singleton E. S. (2004). Teaching online: the changing nature of faculty. In Richards G. (Ed.), In Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 951–956). Chesapeake, VA: AACE

Stark L., Crawford K. (2015). The conservatism of emoji: Work, affect, and communication. Soc. Media Soc. 1:2056305115604853.

Sugar W. A., Warren L. L. (2003). Promoting a teacher/leader-designer perspective for public school teachers. Act. Teach. Educ. 25, 30–37. doi: 10.1080/01626620.2003.10734440 DOI

Tatnall A. (2019). Editorial for EAIT issue 2, 2019. Educ. Inf. Technol. 24, 953–962. doi: 10.1007/s10639-019-09874-7 PubMed DOI PMC

Tawafak R. M., AlFarsi G., Jabbar J. (2021a). Innovative smart phone learning system for graphical systems within COVID-19 pandemic. Contemp. Educ. Technol. 13:ep306. doi: 10.30935/cedtech/10879 DOI

Tawafak R., AlFarsi G., Jabbar J., Malik S. I., Mathew R., AlSidiri A., et al. . (2021b). Impact of technologies during COVID-19 pandemic for improving behavior intention to use E-learning. Int. J. Interact. Mob. Technol. 15, 184–198. doi: 10.3991/ijim.v15i01.17847 DOI

Tawafak R. M., Romli A. B., Alsinani M. (2019). E-learning system of UCOM for improving student assessment feedback in Oman higher education. Educ. Inf. Technol. 24, 1311–1335. doi: 10.1007/s10639-018-9833-0 DOI

Tawafak R. M., Romli A. B., Arshah R. B. A. (2018a). Continued intention to use UCOM: four factors for integrating with a technology acceptance model to moderate the satisfaction of learning. IEEE Access 6, 66481–66498. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2877760 DOI

Tawafak R. M., Romli A. B., Bin Abdullah Arshah R., Almaroof R. A. S. (2018b). Assessing the impact of technology learning and assessment method on academic performance. J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ. 14:20, 2241–2254. doi: 10.29333/ejmste/87117 DOI

Young S. (2006). Student views of effective online teaching in higher education. Am. J. Dist. Educ. 20, 65–77. doi: 10.1207/s15389286ajde2002_2 DOI

Exploring the potential of ChatGPT for foreign language education at the university level