Impact of COVID-19 on distance learning practical design courses

On 11 March 2020, the World Health Organization declared the COVID-19 outbreak a pandemic (Király et al., 2020). The difficulties of combating the COVID-19 pandemic have halted or slowed many educational facilities and economic and socio-cultural activities (Haghani et al., 2020). These circumstances led staff and companies to implement work-from-home policies relying on online platforms instead of the in-office work arrangement to observe social distancing (Király et al., 2020). The internet has played a paramount role in promoting e-learning during the pandemic (Favale et al., 2020). Academics re-evaluated how technology could be utilized at all educational levels to continue knowledge dissemination. Studying the efficacy and students’ perspectives regarding introducing technology into education is crucial, particularly in areas where e-learning is rare (Wijenayaka & Iqbal, 2021). E-learning refers to remote education for students outside the conventional classroom. Instructors must track student progress and ask questions to ensure understanding (Singh et al., 2020). Students may learn via social media and webinars (Keswani et al., 2020). Moodle, Edmodo, Desire2Learn, Google Classroom, and other learning management systems (LMSs) are mediums that have been used to deliver online lectures (Kumar et al., 2020). However, courses like practical chemistry are seldom taught online. Wijenayaka and Iqbal (2021) have shown that the undergraduate chemistry curriculum must include laboratory work to foster practical chemical skills. Because of “fast-changing” social conditions and the pandemic-related social distancing- policy, laboratory-based sessions became difficult to conduct. Therefore, academic and higher education institutions must use technology-based solutions while developing practical chemistry curriculums.

Each science discipline has distinctive traits, prerequisites, and teaching philosophies (Ceylan et al., 2021). Learning a studio-based art curriculum using digital tools can be challenging. Learning technology may seem incongruous with the creative product development of artists who do not utilize digital production tools because artistic creativity is studio-based design courses (Koh & Kan, 2020). Students use interactive studios for leisure and to produce design work, engage, and discuss with each other (Ceylan et al., 2021). Project-based learning emphasizes social and collaborative skills, providing instruction and experience to students. Thus, students’ problem-solving, workplace creativity, and planning is enhanced (Pawar et al., 2020; Sakulviriyakitkul et al., 2020). Applied Arts combines art and engineering education. Fewella et al., (2021) suggest that engineering drawing courses should be taught using recorded videos and online projects that can be used in practical workshops. Few students are present in design classes that require professor–student interaction and evaluation. As such the few students present in such classes due to capacity issues that online classes can help reduce. Alternatives, such as the Zoom videoconferencing platform, that facilitate interactive conversations and drawing adjustments, should be used. The studio space is used to host seminars, lectures, juries, one-on-one critiques, and collaborative or individual work and thus promotes people’s interaction. In the twenty-first century, design studios have various options. Technological innovations have the potential to replace traditional communication and representation methods, thus making way for blended learning and virtual and online studios (Ceylan et al., 2021).

Art and design education has developed new approaches in response to societal changes and global issues (Kokko, 2021). Google Classroom was the most popular online education platform during the COVID-19 pandemic because of its ease of use, whereas Moodle was the most popular platform before the pandemic (Setiawan et al., 2021). Google Classroom is an affordable, accessible, and user-friendly LMS. It offers blended and flipped learning modes, an open-source smartphone application, simplicity, timesaving features, flexibility, cloud support, and digital learning (Kumar et al., 2020). Course content is critical for the success of online learning (Chatterjee et al., 2020; Singh et al., 2020). The school system should employ ICT resources (Gubiani et al., 2019). Students undertaking practical engineering courses must be aware of drawing tools such as AutoCAD. E-learning sites offer videos and drawings for each subject (Khoroshko et al., 2019; Vogt, 2018).

The flipped classroom model presents external technical material through a virtual platform, creating a friendly atmosphere in the classroom that facilitates dialogue, problem-solving, and active learning (Bhat et al., 2020). Contrary to some perceptions, a hybrid strategy with digital tools improves course results (Vivek & Ramkumar, 2021). Ceylan et al. (2021) evaluated an online design studio active during the pandemic. Students valued the studio’s digital tools. The researchers found that with the correct tools and encouragement, distance education can be effective for students’ learning. Alhusban et al. (2022) indicated that most architects believe COVID-19 would impact architectural design, future work, learning, leisure, and teaching environments. Future design should use renewable, power- and water-independent energy. House designs should emphasize interior design, transparency, private areas, quality of life, natural lighting and ventilation, good indoor air quality, use of plants and natural materials, and indoor–outdoor linkages. Interior and architectural design curriculums should be updated accordingly.

Instructors have conceived innovative ways of creating new educational content; they hold global video conferences for students using software like Zoom. These instructors often have no previous experience dealing with e-learning materials (Yuen & Xie, 2020). Megahed et al. (2019) have confirmed that technology offers advantages, such as quicker and easier access to information, greater flexibility, and affordability. Students have become rapidly interested in emerging innovations and technologies because there is tremendous scope for employing technological innovations in the education sector (Violante & Vezzetti, 2014). Students engage in “self-learning” through e-learning classrooms, and teaching is an essential bridge in teacher–student interactions (Phutela & Dwivedi, 2020). Many have recognized that videoconferencing is not inferior to face-to-face instruction; this will help future generations of students in the post-pandemic context (Yuen & Xie, 2020).

Students are familiar with technology integrated into education that produces social skills. Cooperation, commitment, conversation, thinking, problem-solving techniques, and metacognitive skills are the social abilities that are essential for today’s students to adapt suitably to the novel situation of e-learning (Tzifopoulos, 2020). Digital platforms address several problems, such as eliminating old, ineffective teaching methods and the shortage of teachers for specific topics, and foster effective e-learning environments (Phutela & Dwivedi, 2020). E-learning is now adopted frequently because of the multiple advantages it presents (Phutela & Dwivedi, 2020; Purg et al., 2018). Students in engineering faculties have an aptitude for innovation and are interested in digital education (Bhat et al., 2020); hence, they interact with e-learning more positively than others. Kumar et al. (2020) reported on higher education students’ experience of using Google Classroom in Malaysia. They found that the platform was easy to access even for those with no previous experience with online platforms. Furthermore, it easily integrates with other applications, such as YouTube, and is linked to Google Drive’s cloud storage.

Blended learning became beneficial and popular among educators and learners during the pandemic. It made online education convenient and flexible, gave students access to additional resources, and helped students develop critical thinking skills. El-Sofany and El-Haggar (2020) note that e-learning has several essential outcomes, including enhancing student capabilities in using mobile technology for learning, positive academic awareness, and flexible access to mobile services for educational content. Nonetheless, there were several challenges in e-learning. Teachers and students are exhausted from constantly learning and adapting to new technology and completing extra responsibilities and duties, among other issues (Yang, 2021).

Differences in the skill level, cultural background, ethnicity, and personality of students make university education complicated (Okaz, 2015). Gubiani et al. (2019) assert that e-learning should lead to modifications in traditional approaches to encourage student engagement. Professors need training in blended learning just as e-learners must have computer and internet skills. Interactive content development requires technology and skills. Proper training and rapid assistance should be offered. Creating new materials, responding to student feedback swiftly (through forums or e-mails), and updating online courses require much effort. Professors should use high-quality open educational resources to save time for other tasks. Elhaty et al.’s (2020) study on the adoption of e-learning for university practical courses despite the COVID-19 crisis showed that science students and educators worry more about inadequate practical skills than social science students. Notably, 55.6% teachers and 40.8% students preferred live teaching and recording of practical courses. However, Phutela and Dwivedi (2020) noted that in e-learning, students are interactive. Nonetheless, they also observe that face-to-face interaction, which is low in e-learning, is essential for education, and that learning is more manageable during face-to-face communication (Violante & Vezzetti, 2014). Kumar et al. (2020) posit that Google Classroom’s user interface is tiresome and that internet connectivity issues make private messaging between students problematic. Users pointed to the need for improving the interface and navigation and increasing privacy. Others have advised utilizing the application offline or enhancing the university internet connection facility. The pandemic has affected the functioning of the education system; however, it has presented an opportunity to develop and implement alternative educational approaches (Keswani et al., 2020). Gaida et al. (2016) and Zhu and Xu (2021) note that soft skills in studio education should be developed to enable students to share designer viewpoints and oral expressive abilities. Yuen & Xie (2020) recommended three points teachers should follow during and after a pandemic, including providing students with realistic simulation technology. Habib et al. (2021) identified modern technology, an interactive classroom, internet use, and online content as essential e-learning factors. Problem-solving and experience-gathering should be emphasized in art education, while recognizing current industrial needs and retaining studio students to serve the community, integrate, and evolve (Zhu & Xu, 2021).

According to Asadpour’s (2021) study, lockdowns and stay-at-home orders resulting from the COVID-19 outbreak challenged architectural design courses, exposing the shortcomings of traditional education systems and presenting the opportunity for reform. Design studio students rejected self-directed learning and wanted tutors to do more. In developing countries, the education system focuses on teaching skills and neglect motivating and encouraging students. Since e-learning prioritizes individual abilities, sustainable architectural education is possible. Short-term seminars and workshops may combine old and new ideas to show the current path and restore normality. New configurations should rethink e-studio contents, procedures, and outcomes to improve student learning, assessment performance, and course goals. E-design studios need emotional, social, and economic support. Students and teachers should anticipate the drawbacks of social media. Restructuring and utilizing national and university resources is also necessary. E-learning is also affected by wealth inequality. Internet connectivity at architecture schools must improve. Alsuwaida (2022) recommended that professors must organize and deliver online art and design courses appropriately to improve students’ understanding and assimilation. Some instructors overburden learners, causing confusion. Teachers should set clear objectives and guide students to reach them so that they realize how difficult things become easier with repetition and persistence. Instructors should be trained to integrate technology into higher education pedagogy to promote technological literacy.

The present research focuses on two courses of the Department of Interior Design and Furniture at the Faculty of Applied Arts in Egypt. The chosen courses were practical design courses conducted in the design hall studio. The two courses were Furniture Design and Architectural Drawing, which came under engineering drawing. These courses were considered because they are first-year courses. Considering the requirement of physical distance and large-sized drawing sheets and tables, the number of students who were admitted was limited. First-year Interior Design students in 2019–2020 numbered 21. Figure 2 presents the courses’ settings and participants.

These courses were held in the design studios of the department before the pandemic. Table 1 summarizes the details of Architectural Drawing and Furniture Design as project-based learning courses.

Students had to adopt distance learning methods at the beginning of the second semester of the academic year 2019–2020 because of the COVID-19 pandemic. The educational approaches that were developed for these practical courses relied on several teaching methods to achieve the best results in achieving each course’s aim. Figure 3 summarizes the methods and approaches we used for developing the courses.

Many educational approaches were adopted to facilitate the transformation of the traditional teaching model with passive learning pedagogy and engage students in interacting with professors. The flipped classroom model was applied for delivering the two courses to increase student participation and develop critical thinking (Gaida et al., 2016). In the Architectural Drawing course, a discussion was conducted on well-known facade designs. In the Furniture Design course, the designs of Professor Ismail Awaad were presented to the students as part of a task to estimate the original motives of the design as a reverse design process, and all the students engaged successfully. As an alternative to describing the concept behind furniture and its motif design, we exposed the students to something completely different. Professor Ismail Awaad, whose work was significant in restoring the national legacy of Egypt, offered the final designs of his furniture to students, who were encouraged to use their imagination to piece together the inspiration behind Awaad’s motifs and shapes. To gauge the students’ level of achievement in this activity, a discussion was held, during which sections from the designer’s book were presented. Professor Ismail Awaad was shown these findings; he was quite pleased with the students and supported them. Figure 4 presents samples of an inverted Furniture Design session to analyze the Furniture Design pieces of a famous Egyptian furniture designer, Professor Ismail Awaad. https://​www.​youtube.​com/​watch?​v=​p-7pE-BmifA&​t=​656s

Blended learning involves combining classroom experience with online activities (Fewella et al., 2021). Technological approaches in design courses must be processed when transitioning to distance learning courses. The following is an explanation of how applications were used in the process:

Many students stopped showing up to class; consequently, their passion and desire for creative work, which had been high before the pandemic, started to dwindle. Thus, we decided to host a Furniture Design competition for first-year students. The contest was based on a course’s available units’ content. With the aim of energizing the student body, the university’s administration and staff supported the competition. Under the department’s watchful eye, a competition named “Challenge COVID-19 and Innovate at Home” was launched in April 2020. Figure 8 shows samples of the students’ online designs in the competition.

Twenty students out of 21 participated in the competition. In the past, students hesitated to participate in competitions because they perceived discrimination when the same persons consistently won first place. Students participated in encoding drawings to protect the designers’ identities, which helped alleviate any feelings of unfairness or favoritism they may have had. This inspired most students to participate in the competition and electronic exhibition. Participation in the competition was not compulsory and not connected to grades; therefore, the students coded their designs for the anonymous survey. It was important for students not to feel more pressure than the depression they felt when the pandemic started. We created an online exhibition for 20 designs and uploaded it to a free website, allowing us to vote for the top five designs.

We sent the exhibition and voting links to faculty members and furniture specialists. At the end of the specified voting period, an online ceremony was held via Zoom. Figure 9 shows the ceremony that was organized in honor of the first-year students in the design studios after they returned to the faculty in the hybrid learning mode for their efforts during the e-learning period.

The online voting process ended on 15 April 2021, with 55 specialist votes for the first and second stages. Figure 10 shows the samples of the online exhibition and voting for the competition.

We developed an online art gallery to motivate students to complete their final artworks at the end of the course. Visitors to the exhibition exceeded 5,000; this was much higher than the numbers expected under normal circumstances. Thus, the pandemic turned from a curse into a blessing as students got the opportunity to broaden the reach of their work. Figure 11 shows samples of the final Furniture Design gallery in the course.

The online competition and exhibition were new to the students and faculty because competitions and exhibitions are traditionally held in gallery halls with considerable time to prepare.

The students evaluated the impact of e-learning through an online questionnaire using Google Forms with 27 questions. We divided the questionnaire into the following two sections: the effectiveness of online competitions in interior design and furniture and the progress of the courses developed during the pandemic. We also sent the survey to all 21 students enrolled in this course. Seventeen students responded to the first part of the questionnaire about the competition. Table 2 summarizes the online questionnaire design. The online link for the first questionnaire is provided below. https://​docs.​google.​com/​forms/​d/​1F5CYisCQtYLGT23​8nN4IZ0MZIoWWtsy​NpjBMMaKSZZU/​edit#responses

https://​docs.​google.​com/​forms/​d/​1F5CYisCQtYLGT23​8nN4IZ0MZIoWWtsy​NpjBMMaKSZZU/​edit#responses

Twenty students responded to the second part about the developed courses. Table 3 summarizes the second online questionnaire design. The online link for the second questionnaire is presented below. https://​docs.​google.​com/​forms/​d/​1EfEmyVLKD-W_​zYsVCMA0yauTCZLY​P2Eyjl8wfXwrlW0/​viewanalytics

The first part of the questionnaire was about students’ evaluation of the online competition’s effects. Almost 82% of students wished to participate again in competitions. Approximately 70% found that the idea of coding designs to anonymize designers was excellent. The students had been exposed to contests where experts shortlisted the candidates, and then the public voted for the top contenders. In other words, if two people are equally qualified, the one with more friends will ultimately prevail. Therefore, the students voted to keep the design creator’s identity a secret and limit the voting to experts only. Nearly 94% chose to limit the selection of competition judges to university professors and field specialists. Figure 12 displays the student preferences for the selection criteria. The open online gallery voting system and the creation of specific criteria for selection were highly preferred. Figure 13 shows the student responses to the evaluation of the competition’s effectiveness on motivation during the pandemic; almost 53% found that it was excellent.

Most students (88%) supported the establishment of the competition for each study class separately. Almost 76.5% of respondents agreed that regardless of winning or losing, the competition had inspired them not to lose their passion.

The second questionnaire evaluated the courses developed during the pandemic. Half of the students found that the content was good, while the other half found it to be excellent. Additionally, almost 65% affirmed that the lecturer’s performance during the pandemic was excellent. Figure 14 exhibits the evaluation of the students’ understanding of the distance learning course content. One-third (35%) found that the content was very good, and approximately 35% found that it was good. Figure 15 illustrates students’ opinion regarding the courses they would like to undertake online if the pandemic continued. The students could not confirm this because 35% found that the course could be provided online, and the same percentage found that it could not be delivered online.

The majority (90%) found the content easy to access, and almost 80% asserted that using an interactive program, such as Zoom, helped them substantially. Figure 16 shows the student preferences for distance learning in practical courses, and almost 80% confirmed that they preferred interactive lectures through platforms such as Zoom. Figure 17 presents student satisfaction with Google Classroom’s evaluation system; nearly 45% affirmed that they were slightly satisfied.

Almost 85% students asserted that they had internet connection problems while they attended distance education classes. Roughly 70% disclosed that the competition motivated them to work. The students suggested in the course development that they should have pre-course drawing programs. Other students hoped to organize field visits to sites. Some students noted that the university should provide them with free internet connection for e-learning.

The study was conducted in Egypt, and online education in the art sector was not widespread before the pandemic. Distance learning is still in its early stage in developing countries. Educational systems and scientific materials need to be developed further. Ceylan et al. (2021) found that hybrid techniques for design education are best for the design studio. In 2020, people’s understanding of these techniques was enhanced, and schools were prompted to consider them when creating design studio frameworks because of the pandemic conditions. Not all architectural schools in Egypt are prepared for e-learning, and most have never used this learning mode. The psychological effects of working from home have affected students. However, for the successful implementation of e-learning, internet issues must be resolved, staff and students must be taught to utilize online tools for virtual classrooms, and solid e-learning platforms should be created. The future of traditional studios is unclear (Elrawy & Abouelmagd, 2021). Many students have had trouble keeping up with online coursework. In some cases, people’s only access to the web is through their mobile devices because they reside in remote areas or rural villages. The high cost of mobile internet access makes it impractical to use for virtual conferences. Figure 14 shows that this stratification resulted in two distinct groups of students: those who thrived on the ongoing dialogue of that phase and preferred to repeat it and those who struggled to find any utility in it.

The research presents the experience of applying distance learning for the first time in practical courses in the COVID-19 pandemic’s context to develop a general strategy that can be applied in future scenarios. The developed courses were the first to be taught out of the design studio in the university. The student number in the courses was relatively small because of the low number of students accepted in the department based on the seats available in the classrooms. Therefore, future studies should be conducted with more students.

The results confirmed that students were moderately satisfied with the course content; hence, the content should be developed further, and specialized multimedia could be added. Students also preferred interactive programs, such as Zoom, for lectures. Distance learning platforms must be developed to attract students, considering the ease of use and access to content. Providing university support for internet access is preferable considering the internet connectivity issues faced by a large percentage of students. Furthermore, training students in engineering drawing programs early in the specialization is favorable to enable them to efficiently complete their tasks because first-year students were not yet trained in engineering drawing programs, which made it challenging to perform the required tasks without manual tools.

During the quarantine period, students had trouble getting access to the stationary items and specialized engineering tools they needed to do their tasks. The instructor observed the students’ sketching attempts on recycled paper and assumed they would be imaginative. However, these issues could be mitigated if the learners are trained to use engineering drawing software. Their papers, hand drawings, and filming videos could be of poor quality, particularly in the Architectural Drawing course, which requires high precision in drawings, so instructors were allowed to utilize engineering programs as an explanation technique. The students in these webinars utilized Zoom to discuss and modify their designs for the Furniture Design course, which they drew by hand and had the professor correct in real-time using Google Classroom and Zoom.

The students explained that academic competitions and electronic exhibitions motivated them to work under the conditions created by the pandemic. Figure 18 presents the final general strategy for the development of distance education in the fields of arts and engineering. Also, Fallatah’s (2021) study on senior interior design students’ perspectives of distant learning during COVID-19 suggested the following: (* (a) Hybrid teaching technique (b) One-on-one teacher meetings (in person) (c) Finals on campus (d) Additional tutorials for practical course tasks (e) More exams and fewer projects in theoretical courses (f) More project.)