The Impact of Social Distancing Measures on Higher Education Stakeholders

Background and Aim of Study: The global CoVID-19 pandemic has affected education systems dramatically. Remote teaching/learning practices have become everyday reality across the globe. The aim of the study: to assess the level of readiness of higher education stakeholders for distance learning/remote teaching, and to evaluate the role of social distancing measures.


Introduction
Novel coronavirus infection  has affected all spheres of societal life. The first reported illness onset date was 1 December 2019, and the first hospital intake followed on 16 December 2019; in just two months, the World Health Organization declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (Huang et al., 2020;Lai, Shih, Ko, Tang, & Hsueh, 2020). The pandemic left very little time, if any at all, for strategic planning or operational deliberation. Transformations have occurred in most sectors of the economy. Education systems have also experienced the impact of the pandemic, one of the major changes being the implementation of remote teaching/learning practices. In simple words, both students and the faculty are now staying away from university premises in many countries, teaching/learning taking place in virtual environments be means of using modern software and/or messaging systems. Most authors underline the common trend in education systems around the world that consists in responding to the crisis with "emergency eLearning protocols" (Murphy, 2020). It is clear that the pandemic politics will be the object of research for scholars for years and years to come (Williamson, Eynon, & Potter, 2020). So far, they have focused more on "emergency remote teaching", not learning (Hodges, Moore, Lockee, Trust, & Bond 2020). Many authors agree that the current crisis may well become "the biggest educational technology experiment in history" (Anderson, 2020;Daniel, 2020). One aspect of such an experiment is the use of modern digital technologies in education (Melnyk & Pypenko, 2020). Educators across the globe had to adapt quickly to the new forms of actual teaching (Daniel, 2020;Morgan, 2020). However, smooth such adaptation went, it was (and still is) quite a stressful situation for both teachers and students. The crucial factor in organizing the educational process in conditions of the pandemic is the educators' resilience and stress-resistance, i.e. their psychological readiness for teaching under stress (Melnyk & Stadnik, 2020), as well as the policy of individual health protection and the development of student health culture (Melnyk, 2019). The aim of the study. To assess the level of readiness of higher education stakeholders for distance learning/remote teaching, and to evaluate the role of social distancing measures on the stakeholders in conditions of the global pandemic.

Participants and Research Organization
The present study involved 594 stakeholders (216 faculty members and 378 university students) who participated in the survey during the pandemic-related lockdown. Faculty members provided anonymous responses to a questionnaire introduced during the round table discussion on the Zoom Video Communications platform. It was a part of the program of the 6 th International Academic Conference "Psychological and Pedagogical Problems of Modern Specialist Formation" held in June 2020. University students responded to the questionnaire using messenger apps such as Viber, WhatsApp, and Telegram.

Results
Overall results of the survey (4 questions) are given in Table 1. As Question 5 presupposed an extended written answer, no scale is applied to analyze it. Table 1. Overall results of the survey.
The Table 1 data show that 58.9% of respondents, when answering the first question, evaluated highly the level of their respective educational institutions' preparedness for emergency remote teaching caused by CoVID-19 pandemic: 30.8%very high and 28.1%high. In contrast, 31.8% of respondents consider the abovementioned level inadequate: 8.1%very bad, and 23.7%bad. However, 9.3% of respondents were unable to evaluate the above-mentioned level. The answers to the second question show that 88.9% of respondents are prepared, as individuals, to conduct emergency remote teaching, which suggests a higher level of individual levels of readiness in comparison with institutional ones (30.0% higher). Specifically, 29.8% were very well prepared, and 59.1% were well prepared. In contrast, 7.2% rated their level of preparedness as inadequate: 3.2% said it was "very low", and 4.0% said it was "low". A group of respondents was unable to provide the answer to the second question (3.9%). The answers to the third question show that the majority of educators (82.1%) are satisfied with the educational outcomes of emergency remote teaching practices (29.1% highly satisfied, and 53.0% just satisfied). A smaller fraction of respondents (14.4%) are not content with the educational outcomes during the pandemic

IJSA
(10.3% of respondents rated the satisfaction level as "low", and 4.1% as "very low"). Only 3.5% of respondents are unable to evaluate the level of their satisfaction with emergency remote teaching outcomes. The answers to the fourth question dealing with the effect of social distancing measures on physical and mental health demonstrate a different trend. The positive evaluation of the effect was given by 27.3% of respondents (5.6% said it was "very positive", and 21.7% said it was "positive"). However, 54.2 % of respondents evaluated the effect as "negative" (13.1% said it was "very negative", 41.1% said it was "negative", and 18.5% were undecided). Table 2 contains statistical data concerning the differences between two groups of stakeholdersteachers and students.     The critical value χ 2 cr for df=4: χ 2 cr=9.448 by p=0.05; χ 2 cr=13.277 by p=0.01. The calculated value χ 2 is bigger than the critical value (>13.277) in responses to the second question (22.083), to the third question (44.389), and to the fourth question (29.666). It confirms that the differences in the compared aggregates of data are statistically significant (df=4, χ 2 =22.083, р<0.01; df=4, χ 2 =44.389, р<0.01; df=4, χ 2 =29.666, р<0.01). Thus, the statistical analysis has proved that responses from teachers and students demonstrate no difference of opinion when answering the questions dealing with the level of institutional/individual preparedness for emergency remote teaching in conditions of the CoVID-19 pandemic. Both categories of stakeholders reported high levels of individual preparedness for emergency remote teaching/learning, the students displaying a slightly higher level of self-confidence in dealing with the situation. In contrast, the marked differences in responses observed during the survey suggest the idea that the students are affected more by the social distancing measures, which testifies to the negative effect of social distancing on the physical and mental health of this category of stakeholders.

IJSA Discussion
In general, the results comply with a number of findings obtained previously. In the first months of the pandemic, remote teaching practices were analyzed by researchers (Liguori & Winkler, 2020;Maslov, 2020;Ozer, 2020). It has been emphasized that the global-scale emergency called for the creation of a crisis-driven teaching/learning environment rather than complex institutional planning. As such, it may have become "the biggest educational technology experiment in history" (Anderson, 2020;Daniel, 2020). It seems that humankind has been presented with an opportunity to view the world more holistically and realistically (Xafis, Schaefer, Labude, Zhu, & Hsu, 2020). The authors have also described various aspects of using modern digital technologies in education (Melnyk & Pypenko, 2020). In the present paper, we focus on the crisis response by institutions of higher education that varied from country to country. In the digitally advanced countries, the transition was swift. For instance, top-25 U.S. universities discontinued face-to-face schooling at about the same time in March 2020, and every university declared emergency eLearning policies (Murphy, 2020). Consequently, educators had to adapt quickly to the new forms of actual teaching (Daniel, 2020;Morgan, 2020). In most countries, medical education was affected to a great extent, which can be viewed both as a positive influence (a rare opportunity for professional development) and a disruptive one (Alsaf, Abbas, Hassan, & Ali, 2020;McMaste, Veremu, & Santucci, 2020;Ting, Carin, Dzau, & Wong, 2020). Economics education was affected, too. Interestingly, some authors find a lot of positivity in such education practices because educators were made to practice what they typically preach, that is, to adapt to market conditions, to remain agile, and to innovate (Lugiori & Winkler, 2020). However, new concerns have emerged at once. Among many, some are connected with the pitfalls in the use of advanced technology: for instance, "zoombombing" etc. (Reich et al., 2020). But it is obvious that, nevertheless, the crucial factor in organizing the educational process in conditions of the pandemic is the stress-resistance level of the teachers (Melnyk & Stadnik, 2020), as well as the policy of individual health protection and the development of student health culture (Melnyk, 2019). The present survey results have proved that the target group of educators from 20 countries was/is well prepared for the pandemic-driven emergency remote teaching, which includes the flexibility of institutional support. The lower level of satisfaction with the educational outcomes can be viewed as a manifestation of teacher-specific neuroticism that works against overestimating the gains rather than an indicator of a decline in the quality of teaching. It has been suggested that the pandemic may be a factor of 'revolutionizing' teaching/learning practices, the main impact being on the system of professional values shared by educators worldwide (Melnyk, Pypenko, & Maslov, 2020). The survey participants reported increased opportunities for research work, familiarizing with educational management activities and wider contacts with the international educational community.

Conclusions
The survey results demonstrate that the impact of social distancing measures on higher education practices is quite significant. The majority of participants have assessed highly their individual levels of both preparedness for teaching/learning and of satisfaction with the educational outcomes. Interestingly, students have displayed higher levels of preparedness and satisfaction. However, the assessment of the impact of social distancing measures on physical and mental health is generally more negative, the trend being more visible in student responses.