Discussion post
JaneDoe26
MixedMethodsArticle.2021-1.pdf
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Student’s experiences with online teaching
following COVID-19 lockdown: A mixed
methods explorative study
Kari AlmendingenID 1*, Marianne Sandsmark Morseth1, Eli Gjølstad2, Asgeir Brevik1,
Christine Tørris1
1 Faculty of Health Sciences, Department of Nursing and Health Promotion, Oslo Metropolitan University,
Oslo, Norway, 2 Department of Primary and Secondary Teacher Education, Faculty of Education and
International Studies, Oslo Metropolitan University, Oslo, Norway
Abstract
Background
The COVID-19 pandemic lead to a sudden shift to online teaching and restricted campus
access.
Aim
To assess how university students experienced the sudden shift to online teaching after clo-
sure of campus due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Material and methods
Students in Public Health Nutrition answered questionnaires two and 12 weeks (N = 79:
response rate 20.3% and 26.6%, respectively) after the lockdown in Norway on 12 March
2020 and participated in digital focus group interviews in May 2020 (mixed methods study).
Findings and discussion
Two weeks into the lockdown, 75% of students reported that their life had become more diffi-
cult and 50% felt that learning outcomes would be harder to achieve due to the sudden shift
to online education. Twelve weeks into the lockdown, the corresponding numbers were 57%
and 71%, respectively. The most pressing concerns among students were a lack of social
interaction, housing situations that were unfit for home office purposes, including insufficient
data bandwidth, and an overall sense of reduced motivation and effort. The students collab-
orated well in digital groups but wanted smaller groups with students they knew rather than
being randomly assigned to groups. Most students agreed that pre-recorded and streamed
lectures, frequent virtual meetings and student response systems could improve learning
outcomes in future digital courses. The preference for written home exams over online ver-
sions of previous on-campus exams was likely influenced by student’s familiarity with the
former. The dropout rate remained unchanged compared to previous years.
PLOS ONE
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250378 August 31, 2021 1 / 16
a1111111111
a1111111111
a1111111111
a1111111111
a1111111111
OPEN ACCESS
Citation: Almendingen K, Morseth MS, Gjølstad E,
Brevik A, Tørris C (2021) Student’s experiences
with online teaching following COVID-19 lockdown:
A mixed methods explorative study. PLoS ONE
16(8): e0250378. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.
pone.0250378
Editor: Mohammed Saqr, KTH Royal Institute of
Technology, SWEDEN
Received: September 30, 2020
Accepted: April 6, 2021
Published: August 31, 2021
Copyright: © 2021 Almendingen et al. This is an
open access article distributed under the terms of
the Creative Commons Attribution License, which
permits unrestricted use, distribution, and
reproduction in any medium, provided the original
author and source are credited.
Data Availability Statement: All relevant data are
within the manuscript and its Supporting
Information files.
Funding: The author(s) received no specific
funding for this work.
Competing interests: The authors have declared
that no competing interests exist.
Conclusion
The sudden shift to digital teaching was challenging for students, but it appears that they
adapted quickly to the new situation. Although the concerns described by students in this
study may only be representative for the period right after campus lockdown, the study pro-
vide the student perspective on a unique period of time in higher education.
Introduction
The Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused extraordinary challenges in the
global education sector [1,2]. Most countries temporarily closed educational institutions in an
attempt to contain the spread of the virus and reduce infections [3]. In Norway, the move to
online teaching and learning methods accelerated as a consequence of the physical closure of
universities and university colleges on 12 March 2020 [4]. Education is better implemented
through active, student-centered learning strategies, as opposed to traditional educator-cen-
tered pedagogies [5,6]. At the time of the COVID-19 outbreak, the decision to boost the use of
active student-centered learning methods and digitalisation had already been made at both the
governmental and institutional levels [7,8] because student-active learning (such as use of stu-
dent response systems and flipping the classroom) increase motivation and improve learning
outcomes [5,7,9]. However, the implementation of this insight was lagging behind. Traditional
educator-centered pedagogies dominated higher education in Norway prior to the lockdown,
and only 30% of academic teachers from higher institutions reported having any previous
experience with online teaching [4]. Due to the COVID-19 lockdown, most educators had to
change their approaches to most aspects of their work overnight: teaching, assessment, super-
vision, research, service and engagement [4,10].
Bachelor’s and master’s in Public Health Nutrition (PHN) represents two small-sized pro-
grammes at Oslo Metropolitan University (OsloMet). PHN is defined as ‘the application of
nutrition and public health principles to design programs, systems, policies, and environments
that aims to improve or maintain the optimal health of populations and targeted groups’
[11,12]. Traditional teaching methods dominated on both programs during winter 2020. Fol-
lowing the lockdown, online learning for the continuation of academic activities and the pre-
vention of dropouts from study programmes in higher education were given the highest
priority. Due to an extraordinary effort by both the administrative and academic staff, digital
alternatives to the scheduled on-campus academic activities were offered to PHN students
already in the first week following lockdown. The scheduled on-campus lectures were mainly
offered as live-streamed plenary lectures lasting 30–45 minutes, mainly using the video confer-
encing tool Zoom. Throughout the spring semester educators received training in digital
teaching from the institution and increasingly made use of online student response systems
(such as Padlet and Mentimeter) as well as tools to facilitate digital group-work (Zoom/Micro-
soft Teams). Non-theoretical lectures (e.g. cooking classes), were cancelled, and face-to-face
exams were re-organized into digital alternatives in order to ensure normal teaching opera-
tions. Several small tweaks were employed to minimize dropout. There was no time for coordi-
nating the different courses with regards to the types of online teaching activities, exams and
assessments. Social media, i.e Facebook, and SMS were the primary communication channels
the first week after lockdown. The use of learning management systems (LMS) Canvas and
digital assessment system, Inspera, remained mainly unchanged. Due to the new situation, the
deadline for the submission of bachelor theses was postponed by 48 hours. In addition,
PLOS ONE Experiences of COVID-19 lockdown among Norwegian students
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250378 August 31, 2021 2 / 16
bachelor students submitting their thesis where given permission to use the submission dead-
line for the deferred exam in August as their ordinary exam deadline. The deadline for the sub-
mission of master theses was extended by one week, but all planned master exams were
completed by the end of June, including oral examinations using Zoom instead of the tradi-
tional face-to-face examinations on campus. Even though most of the new online activities
where put in place with limited regard for subtle nuances of pedagogical theory, and did not
allow for much student involvement, the dropout rate from PHN programs remained
unchanged compared to previous years. PHN is a small-sized education with close follow up
of students. However, although the students experienced a digital revolution overnight, we
know little about how they experienced the situation after the university closed for on-campus
activities.
Accordingly, the purpose of this study was to assess how Norwegian PHN students experi-
enced the shift to digital teaching following campus lockdown. Students were also asked to
provide feedback on what might improve the learning outcomes in future online lectures and
courses.
Methods
Design and sampling
This study utilised a mixed methods cross-sectional design, where quantitative and qualitative
methods complemented each other. An invitation to participate was sent out to 79 eligible stu-
dents via multiple channels (Facebook, Teams, Zoom, LMS Canvas, SMS), with several
reminders. The only eligibility criteria was being a student in PHN during spring 2020. All stu-
dents received the quantitative survey. Due to few students eligible for each focus group inter-
view, all who wanted to participate were interviewed/included. The invited students were in
their second-year (n = 17) and third-year (n = 28) bachelor’s and first-year (n = 13) and sec-
ond-year (n = 21) master’s programme at PHN in the Faculty of Health Sciences at OsloMet.
The response rate was 16/79 (20.3%) and 21/79 (26.6%). Two focus group interviews were
scheduled in each class (a total of 8) but only 4 interviews were conducted. The research team
was heterogeneously composed of members with both pedagogical and health professional
backgrounds.
Online questionnaire
To the best of our knowledge, this study was the first “corona” study at our Faculty. No suitable
national or international questionnaire had been developed and /or validated by March 2020.
Hence, online questionnaires for the present study were designed virtually ‘over-night’. The
questions were however based on experiences from a large-scale interprofessional learning
course using the blended learning approach at OsloMet [13,14] and specific experiences that
academic staff in Norway reported during the first week of teaching during the lockdown [4].
The questionnaires were based on an anonymous self-administrated web survey ‘Nettskjema’
[15]. ‘Nettskjema’ is a Norwegian tool for designing and conducting online surveys with fea-
tures that are customised for research purposes. It is easy to use, and the respondents can sub-
mit answers from a browser on a computer, mobile phone or tablet. During the first week after
lockdown, the questionnaire was sent out to university colleagues and head of studies and
revised accordingly. The questionnaires were deliberately kept short because the response rate
is generally low in student surveys [16]. Ideally, we should have pretested and validated the
questionnaires, but this was not possible within the short-time frame after lockdown. Items
were measured on a five-level ordinal scale (Likert scale 0–5). The two forms contained both
numerical and open questions, permitting both quantitative and qualitative analyses. The first
PLOS ONE Experiences of COVID-19 lockdown among Norwegian students
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250378 August 31, 2021 3 / 16
questionnaire was sent out to the students on 25 March 2020 (two weeks after the closure of
university campus; students were asked to submit their answers during the period from 12
March until the link was closed at Easter Holiday), and the second questionnaire was sent on 3
June 2020 (12 weeks after closure; students were asked to submit their answers during the
period after Easter and until the end of the spring semester). The questionnaires were distrib-
uted as web links embedded in the LMS Canvas application. Because live-streamed lectures
were offered primarily through Zoom during the first weeks, students were not asked about
interactive digital teaching and tools in the first questionnaire. At the end of both question-
naires, the students were asked what they believed could improve the learning experience in
future online education. The qualitative part consisted of text answers to open questions from
the two electronic questionnaires.
Digital focus group interview
To capture meaningful insights into the participants experiences, we conducted digital focus
group interviews [17], aiming to conduct one digital focus group interview in each class. PHN
is a small sized education, and the teachers know all the students. The focus group interviews
were therefore performed by two external independent researchers (EG and CT) who are not
directly involved in the PHN education and had no prior knowledge to the students. The two
interviewers (moderators) were middle-aged female teachers working in the university, and
both have significant experience in digitalizing education. They were presented to the partici-
pants as researchers from the university. The report of this study was guided by the consoli-
dated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ). The interviews were conducted via
the video conferencing system Zoom during May 2020, following internal guidelines [18]. In
the focus group interviews, the participants reflected on their own experiences, and the moder-
ator guided the discussion using a semi-structured interview guide. This guide was prepared
based on the research questions. One pilot interview was conducted, which resulted in some
minor changes to the interview guide. The results from the pilot interview are not included in
the results. The focus group interviews lasted for approximately one hour, and five students
were invited to each focus group interview. The interviews were not recorded, but the modera-
tor took notes, ensuring that the participants remained anonymised.
Data analysis
Quantitative data are described descriptively with numbers and percentages. Apart from re-
categorization of response categories, no statistical analysis was performed. Quantitative data
were extracted directly from the survey system. Answers in categories 0 or 1 were categorised
as ‘Disagree/slightly agree’, answers in categories 2 or 3 were categorised as ‘Somewhat agree’
and answers in categories 4 or 5 were categorised as ‘Agree’. Qualitative data were analysed
using systematic text condensation (STC), inspired by Giorgi’s phenomenological approach
and modified by Malterud [17]. First, the entire texts (from the interviews) were read to get an
overall impression, and preliminary themes were derived from the interviews. Then, meaning
units, such as sentences and words, were identified and connected with the preliminary theme
to elucidate the study question. The meaning units were then coded and systemized into
groups, so that meaning could be abstracted from the different code groups. Finally, the mean-
ings of the various units were summarised. The qualitative data from the questionnaire were
then extracted by the moderators, and the words and sentences were identified and abstracted.
In order to ensure quality, the notes from the focus group interviews and the text answers
from the questionnaires were reviewed by both moderators.
PLOS ONE Experiences of COVID-19 lockdown among Norwegian students
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250378 August 31, 2021 4 / 16
Ethical considerations
All participants gave their informed consent. The questionnaires did not include questions
about personal health information or sensitive data. The quantitative data were collected
through an anonymous web survey using ‘Nettskjema’ [15]. Internal routines at OsloMet for
using Zoom in research interviews were applied [18]. In the interviews, the participants pro-
vided their written consent in the chat without their names and remained anonymous. The
data protection was approved by the Norwegian Centre for Research Data (NSD, reference no.
846363), as PHN is a small-sized study programme and because Zoom was used for the digital
focus group interviews.
Results
Quantitative data
There were 16 (20.3%) and 21 (26.6%) students who answered the questionnaires two and 12
weeks after lockdown, respectively (Table 1). Both samples had an even distribution of bache-
lor and master students.
Among the respondents two and 12 weeks after lockdown, 7/16 students (44%) and 9/21
students (43%) reported having previous experience with online learning, respectively
(Table 1). After two weeks of forced online education, 8/16 students (50%) expected that their
learning outcomes would be inferior with online education compared to their pre-COVID-19
education at campus. After 12 weeks, 15/ 21 students (71%) expected that their learning out-
come would be lower, and, notably, none of the students expected that it would be higher. On
both occasions, most students reported that studying had become more difficult compared to
the time before the pandemic.
Table 1. Characteristics of the sample and views about studying, two and 12 weeks after the national lockdown in
Norway on 12 March 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
2 weeks after lockdown
n = 16
12 weeks after lockdown
n = 21
n (%) n (%)
Age, years
� 21 0 (0) 0 (0)
22–25 7 (44) 11 (52)
26 9 (56) 10 (48)
Study programme
Bachelor 8 (50) 11 (52)
Master 8 (50) 10 (48)
Prior experience with digital learning 7 (44) 9 (43)
Expectations upon learning outcome from digital
education
Higher 3 (19) 0 (0)
Lower 8 (50) 15 (71)
No change 6 (38) 5 (24)
Do not know a NA 2 (10)
Studying has become more challenging after COVID-19
lockdown
12 (75) 12 (57)
a Only after 12 weeks.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250378.t001
PLOS ONE Experiences of COVID-19 lockdown among Norwegian students
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250378 August 31, 2021 5 / 16
Several of the identified challenges with online education were reported by more than 50%
of the students, and there was an uneven spread across categories of answers (Tables 2 and 3).
Only one of 16 students (6%) agreed that they needed to increase their digital competence, but
approximately half reported having technical challenges at home. All of the students agreed
that the lack of contact with other students was a challenge. However, after 12 weeks, the lack
of contact with academic staff seemed to pose less of a challenge.
After 12 weeks, 20/21 students (95%) agreed that their motivation and effort had been
reduced. At the same time, all students wanted to return to campus. Only 5/21 (24%) reported
that their learning outcomes had not deteriorated.
Suggestions for how to increase learning outcome in future digital courses
Two weeks after lockdown, most students answered that the use of different components of
online education would improve the learning outcomes in a future online course (Table 4).
Regarding participation in digital group work, there was a nearly even spread across the differ-
ent categories of answers. Finally, participants preferred written home exams and feedback
over the digital options suggested (Table 5).
After 12 weeks of (forced) online teaching, more ambivalence toward the use of digital
learning tools could be detected (Table 6). However, the proportion of students who agreed
that digital group work would increase the learning outcomes seemed unchanged (around 1/3
of both samples). In line with the findings obtained only two weeks after lockdown, written
submissions and feedback seemed to be preferable to digital exam options (Table 7).
Table 2. Challenges with digital education two weeks after the COVID-19 lockdown (sample before Easter, n = 16).
Challenge Disagree/slightly agreea n (%) Somewhat agreeb n (%) Agreec n (%)
Cannot study due to changes in society 4 (25) 8 (50) 4 (25)
Technical: computer at home 10 (63) 3 (19) 3 (19)
Technical: lack of digital competence 13 (81) 2 (13) 1 (6)
Lack of social interaction 0 (0) 3 (20) 13 (80)
Work situation (children, home) 6 (38) 8 (50) 2 (13)
Privacy issues 12 (75) 3 (19) 1 (6)
Sickness 12 (75) 1 (6) 3 (19)
a On a scale from 0 to 5, answers 0 or 1. b Answers 2 or 3. c Answers 4 or 5.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250378.t002
Table 3. Challenges with digital education 12 weeks after the COVID-19 lockdown (sample at end of semester, n = 21).
Challenge Disagree/slightly agreea n (%) Somewhat agreeb n (%) Agreec n (%)
Technical: computers 10 (48) 6 (29) 5 (24)
Technical: insufficient bandwidth 12 (58) 5 (24) 4 (19)
House unfit for home office purposes 5 (24) 3 (14) 13 (62)
Lack of academic contact with peers 1 (5) 1 (5) 19 (91)
Lack of academic contact with staff 3 (14) 9 (43) 9 (43)
Lack of social contact with peers 0 (0) 4 (19) 17 (81)
Reduced motivation and effort 1 (5) 11 (52) 9 (43)
Lower learning outcome 5 (24) 7 (33) 9 (43)
Inadequate information about exam 3 (14) 11 (52) 7 (33)
Desire to return to on campus activates 0 (0) 2 (10) 19 (91)
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250378.t003
PLOS ONE Experiences of COVID-19 lockdown among Norwegian students
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250378 August 31, 2021 6 / 16
After 12 weeks, 16/21 students (76%) agreed that social interaction plays a role in learning
outcomes and well-being (Table 8), and an equal proportion agreed that it was important that
everyone had their camera on during teaching.
There were 15/21 students (71%) who agreed that their digital competence and interest in
digital teaching methods had increased while 6/21 students (29%) disagreed with this
statement.
Qualitative data
In total, there were four master students who participated in digital focus group interviews (on
two different occasions, with three students and one student in the groups, respectively).
Digital lectures. The students were satisfied with the teaching and reported that the lec-
turers were competent in arranging online teaching. The lecturers were also good at adapting
to the students’ wishes regarding teaching. Lectures that were streamed live (synchronous clas-
ses) were preferred over recordings (asynchronous). One student said it was a privilege to still
be able to study even though the university campus was closed due to corona and all the lec-
tures were digital. The students expressed that it is an advantage if the lecturer has digital com-
petence to ensure that the lecture runs smoothly without digital/technical problems, or if there
is a co-host who can assist. Technical competence is also important when invitation links are
Table 4. Activities that would increase learning outcomes in future digital courses (sample before Easter, n = 16).
Activity Disagree/slightly agreea n (%) Somewhat agreeb n (%) Agreec n (%)
Podcast 3 (19) 5 (31) 8 (50)
Recorded in advance 0 (0) 4 (25) 12 (75)
Live streaming 2 (13) 4 (25) 10 (62)
Virtual seminars 2 (13) 4 (25) 10 (62)
Participation in chats 2 (13) 6 (38) 8 (50)
Participation in digital student groups 5 (31) 4 (25) 7 (44)
Increased number of written submissions 4 (25) 7 (44) 5 (31)
Increased use of student response systems (Kahoot, Mentimeter etc) 3 (19) 6 (38) 7 (44)
Increased degree of mandatory participation 5 (31) 9 (56) 2 (13)
a Answered 0 or 1 on a scale from 0 to 5. b Answered 2 or 3. c Answered 4 or 5.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250378.t004
Table 5. Types of exams that would be suitable in a future digital course (sample before Easter, n = 16).
Type of exam Disagree/slightly agreea n (%) Somewhat agreeb n (%) Agreec n (%)
Multiple choice 3 (19) 4 (25) 9 (56)
Written home exams 0 (0) 3 (19) 13 (81)
Video recordings (submissions) 9 (56) 3 (19) 4 (25)
Podcast (submissions) 11 (67) 2 (13) 3 (19)
Live exam via Zoom/Skype/teams etc. 2 (13) 7 (44) 7 (44)
Written feedback 0 (0) 4 (25) 12 (75)
Oral feedback 4 (25) 8 (50) 4 (25)
a On a scale from 0 to 5, answers 0 or 1. b Answers 2 or 3. c Answers 4 or 5.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250378.t005
PLOS ONE Experiences of COVID-19 lockdown among Norwegian students
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250378 August 31, 2021 7 / 16
sent out. It signals that the student group is well taken care of. The informants described a
course co-ordinator as a person with a good overview and sense of responsibility—someone
who is good at structure and order. These qualities were highlighted as important in a fully
digitalised teaching program.
The students did not support compulsory attendance, as it would reduce the feeling of free-
dom that most students value. If learning activities were compulsory, students felt it might also
present challenges in dealing with their children and part-time work. The students expressed
that most of their fellow students were present in lectures that went live on Zoom. One student
stated that live digital lectures were best because it was easier to ask questions. When using a
flipped classroom or recordings, the questions must be written down and asked afterwards,
but both options (flipped classroom and live streaming) were perceived as fine.
Interestingly, the qualitative results from the questionnaire indicated that some students
found it easy to ask questions, while others thought it had become more difficult. According to
one student, ‘As long as we have the opportunity to ask questions online, I think it will go just
fine. I commute three hours per school day to get to and from school, so I feel I have more
time to work with school now that the lecture is online’.
One of the informants thought that interaction was challenging, and it did not feel as natu-
ral to ask questions in online classes. ‘Raising your hand’ was not perceived to be as easy as in
the face-to-face setting on campus, which could mean that the students did not always get
answers to their questions.
The students’ indicated that recorded lectures should not be longer than one hour, as it is
easy to lose focus, and one must rewind the recordings. For live online lectures, two hours was
deemed fine, and they were perceived as fun to watch. However, each session of the live online
lectures should not be longer than 45 minutes.
The online teaching (mainly in the form of synchronous plenum lectures originally
intended as on-campus lectures) was challenging in the beginning because some students fell
out of the digital rooms due to technical reasons, but it got better over time. Some students
Table 6. Activities which would increase learning outcomes in future online courses (sample at end of semester, n = 21).
Activity Disagree/slightly agreea n (%) Somewhat agreeb n (%) Agreec n (%)
Participate in digital student groupsa 7 (33) 12 (57) 2 (10)
Flipped classrooma 8 (38) 11 (52) 2 (10)
Student response systems (Kahoot, Mentimeter etc) 3 (14) 9 (43) 9 (43)
Written submission of assignment 3 (14) 7 (33) 11 (52)
Digital submission of assignment (podcast, film etc) 8 (38) 7 (33) 6 (29)
Frequent digital meeting with academic staff 2 (10) 7 (33) 12 (57)
a Instead of seeing lectures live/streamed lectures?.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250378.t006
Table 7. Forms of exams that would be suitable in a future digital course (sample at end of semester, n = 21).
Type of exam Disagree/slightly agreea n (%) Somewhat agreeb n (%) Agreec n (%)
Multiple choice 6 (29) 5 (24) 10 (48)
Written home exam 0 (0) 8 (38) 13 (62)
Digital recordings (submission of video/podcast) 11 (52) 7 (33) 3 (14)
Live exams via Zoom/Skype/teams etc. 9 (43) 8 (38) 4 (19)
Written feedback 1 (5) 5 (24) 15 (71)
Oral feedback 4 (19) 5 (24) 12 (57)
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250378.t007
PLOS ONE Experiences of COVID-19 lockdown among Norwegian students
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250378 August 31, 2021 8 / 16
experienced poor bandwidth, which led to them not being able to turn on their camera and
reduced sound quality. One student stated that poor internet quality was something he could
not do anything about, but it resulted in a non-optimal learning situation. It was suggested
that using a flipped classroom/recorded lectures in the first weeks after lockdown could have
solved this problem.
The respondents pointed out that the use of several conference systems/channels in addi-
tion to LMS Canvas provided a poor overview and ineffective communication, and they would
prefer a single learning platform. The students were unsure how to contact their teachers in
the first weeks after lockdown due to the use of several platforms. Even with a single contact
channel (LMS), the students found that the threshold barrier for sending questions to the
teacher through email was high.
When asked what they thought about ‘black screens’ (students turning off the camera), sev-
eral answered that this reduced the quality of communication between the lecturer and stu-
dent. The lecturer missed affirmative nods from students, and the students also likely missed
parts of the communication when the camera was turned off. In some of the lectures, all of the
students were encouraged to keep the camera on, and some of the lecturers asked the students
questions to initiate two-way communication. The students expressed that it was nice to see
the other attending students on video. Furthermore, the participants felt that the lecturers
mainly engaged the students who had their camera on. However, several students said that
they turned off their cameras during the lectures because the session was being recorded.
Another stated that having the camera on was particularly useful when having discussions in
digital groups. The students who participated in the survey wished for more recorded lectures,
indicating that their lecturers did not do this often.
One of the informants assumed that she would have turned off the camera when recording
the lecture, and she thought she had not contributed much. She would have to consider
whether a question was ‘stupid’ before asking it, and probably she had not asked any questions
at all. She thought this was due to habit, and she indicated that one might get used to being
recorded. That is, if recording had been the norm and she had become accustomed to it, it
would have been easier to relate to.
All of the informants agreed that presentations with audio were useful, as the material
could be repeated by rewinding to the desired location. They also reported that it sometimes
took a while for the teachers to post such files, even though the students found these learning
resources very useful.
They noticed an increased attendance rate among their peers in the online lectures, which
they perceived as positive. The reason for the increased attendance, they believed, was that
many students have to make a long trip to attend class, and the threshold for participating had
become lower now that all teaching was online. This was supported by the qualitative results
from the questionnaire, where a student said, ‘I commute several hours per school day to get to
and from school, so I feel I have more time to work with school now that the lecture is online’.
However, one of the informants pointed out that it is important for students to be able to
talk to each other when the lecturer is not present, that group activities should be arranged and
Table 8. Statements relevant to online education (sample at end of semester, n = 21).
Statement Disagree/slightly agreea n (%) Somewhat agreeb n (%) Agreec n (%)
Social interaction does not influence learning outcome and satisfaction 16 (76) 3 (14) 2 (10)
It is important that everybody has camera on (video on) 5 (24) 6 (28) 10 (48)
It is important that the grouping is random so that everyone can get to know each other 8 (38) 7 (33) 6 (29)
My digital skills have increased 6 (29) 11 (52) 4 (19)
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250378.t008
PLOS ONE Experiences of COVID-19 lockdown among Norwegian students
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250378 August 31, 2021 9 / 16
that they should be provided with opportunities for voluntary meetings on campus in their
spare time. One of the informants believed it to be important that the students themselves
have a responsibility to address the learning environment and initiate meetings in both aca-
demic and social arenas. One felt that it was not desirable that the university was responsible
for social contact between peers. It was suggested that time could be set aside, for example,
after teaching, so that only students could talk together. It was expressed that in order to pre-
serve social aspects in digital teaching and learning, the first meeting should be on campus. A
mentor scheme was suggested, where former students could give tips and advice on how to
function as a ‘digital student’.
Digital group work. The students expressed that they mainly collaborated well in digital
groups (breakout rooms). Communication usually worked well with both the teacher and
peers in these digital rooms. Nevertheless, some students reported that group work was not
effective when it was carried out in ‘breakout rooms’. The students felt that the allocated time
for group work was too short for collaboration, and some of the time was spent on technical
challenges. There were also some students who withdrew from the group work, which the
respondents believed was because some were shy. One student said that discussions during
group work paid off and that communication worked well, but it was a pity that so few stu-
dents participated. Getting to know the others in the group well was also deemed to be impor-
tant for the level of collaboration and professional discussions. The students did not like to be
randomly assigned into groups. However, they expressed that it would be advantageous to
plan for more group work in smaller groups.
Another positive effect of online teaching the students highlighted was the increased
amount of written feedback from lecturers on work submitted voluntarily. The students per-
ceived that this was offered as a compensation for shorter teaching sessions.
One of the respondents thought that it was important to socially interact with peers and
missed having lunch with fellow students. Others felt that there had not been many social gath-
erings in the group previously, and so they did not experience the absence of fellow students as
a great loss. They also pointed out that students who had met each other physically at an earlier
time had a different starting point in online meetings and for online education. One student
stated, ‘Getting to know new peers digitally feels weird’. Furthermore, one of the informants
pointed out that most people have a general need for physical contact, and that touching and
eye-to-eye contact is important.
Motivation. Some of the students were more motivated to participate in online learning
activities, yet it was perceived to require greater effort to stay motivated and ‘in the course’.
Some students work alongside their studies and thus do not attend classes, and others have
children who must be tended to. Some indicated that student response systems such as Menti-
meter, Quizlet, Padlet, Kahoot! and the use of polls was motivating factors, but it depended on
the context in which they were used. Some of the students reported that they especially liked
Kahoot, but it was important that the use of such response systems was done in a structured
way. They expressed that they liked the teaching programme, which consisted of an introduc-
tory video and teaching in which the basics were presented, followed by group work and finally
teaching, where the teacher went more in depth. This approach made it easier to follow the
teaching and to ask questions.
The students said it was good for motivation when an overview of the course content was
published, as it contributed to predictability and more people participate when they know
what is planned.
Nevertheless, the qualitative results from the questionnaire indicated that it was difficult to
get an overview of everything that needed to be done. It could be challenging to concentrate
and have self-discipline due to many distractions, which reduced the students’ motivation.
PLOS ONE Experiences of COVID-19 lockdown among Norwegian students
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250378 August 31, 2021 10 / 16
Several students expressed that they felt alone in their studies, and it was difficult to feel alone
with the responsibility for learning the curriculum. One student wrote that there was consider-
able uncertainty, which negatively affected concentration, and that the COVID-19 crises was a
difficult time for everyone.
Discussion
Overall, these students were satisfied with the ad hoc online teaching after the lockdown,
although they experienced self-perceived reduced learning outcomes compared to the pre-
pandemic situation. It appears that they adapted quickly to the new situation, but they also
reported difficulties with the transition to new teaching methods. Based on both the surveys
and interviews, the most pressing concerns among students were a lack of social interaction,
housing situations that were unsuitable for home office purposes, including insufficient data
bandwidth, and a sense of reduced motivation and effort. PHN is a small sized education
which enables close contact between educators and students. The low student volume might
explain why the dropout rate from the bachelor and master programs remained unchanged
compared to that in previous years.
Receiving teaching, supervision, exams and assessments solely through online solutions
was a new experience for these students. Apart from a 15-credit mandatory bachelor course
offered as hybrid learning (7), traditional teaching methods still dominated the bachelor and
master study programmes of PHN in winter 2020. Importantly, the students evaluated the ad
hoc solutions offered during the chaotic spring of 2020 rather than a well-planned, high-quality
online education using student-active methods [5]. Teachers switched to online teaching with-
out any time to learn the technology, or standard quality online teaching practices [4]. They had
many years of experience teaching in -person, and they had arranged their lessons and interac-
tive elements around this mode of learning. Alternatively, they had very little experience teach-
ing online. The students’ experiences in these online learning environments, which were
thrown together at the last minute, are not necessarily indicative of students’ experiences in a
quality online course based on principles from Quality Matters online education [19].
Although the students reported reduced learning outcomes after 12 weeks dominated by
synchronous live-streamed lectures lasting for 30–45 minutes on Zoom, they had positive atti-
tudes toward use of digital learning materials and tools in future online courses. For asynchro-
nous lectures, the rule of thumb in online education is less than 10–15 minutes [19]. Although
lectures of 45 minute duration is far beyond what is recommended for digital teaching [19],
the students responded based on their recent experiences where many teachers, for reasons of
feasibility, conducted their planned on-campus lectures digitally shortly after lockdown. Some
of the students also reported that they especially liked Kahoot, however, since we wanted to
keep the research questionnaire short, we did not ask more in detail for concrete digital tools.
A pre-corona study from OsloMet reported that physiotherapy students’ attitudes toward a
flipped classroom intervention were mainly positive, although the academic outcomes from
the final exam were similar to those in previous years [20]. Further, in a recent large-scale pre-
COVID-19 blended learning interprofessional course conducted a few weeks ahead of the
lockdown, first-year bachelor’s students at OsloMet reported positive perceptions of the
blended learning approach, using only short video clips (less than 10 minutes) [21]. Approxi-
mately 3/4 of the students in that study disagreed that virtual group discussions resulted in bet-
ter learning outcomes than face-to-face group discussions. The present data do not conflict
with the findings from that larger-scale study.
The students expressed in various ways that online teaching with a lack of social interaction
leads to worse learning outcomes and lower levels of motivation and well-being. Concerns
PLOS ONE Experiences of COVID-19 lockdown among Norwegian students
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250378 August 31, 2021 11 / 16
about lack of face-to-face contact may have been aggravated by the stressful situation, and con-
tentment with teaching methods would likely improve if teachers had been able to integrate
the appropriate elements in a fully digitalized course. Face-to-face interactions provide the
foundation for social communication, the lack of which can be viewed as a critical disadvan-
tage of online learning [5]. Face-to-face training may be particular crucial for candidates
expected to have communication skills, such as nutritionists [11,12,22–24]. The ad hoc solu-
tions for teaching offered during the 2020 spring term were thus not in agreement with the
suggested conceptual dimensions, which allow students to expand their knowledge beyond the
intended learning outcome established by the teacher: motivation and attention [5].
The students expressed concerns that are common in traditional in-class teaching as well,
and such issues should not be overlooked in online teaching [25,26]: insufficient pre-class
study preparation, limited participation and inadequate depth in class discussions. Quality of
education lies in the knowledge, skills and expertise that are conveyed as well as in the manner
in which they are communicated and learned [7,26]. In different ways, the students’ responses
revolved around central quality aspects, such as learning objectives, content, programme
design, adaptation, teaching, work methods, supervision and forms of assessment [7]. These
findings are in agreement with other studies on COVID-19 and education [4,25,27].
The students stated that they received insufficient information about the exams. This is
understandable because staff initially did not know how the different exams would be digitally
transformed in spring term 2020. Asked about exam preferences students said that they pre-
ferred longer written exams at home, over old campus-style exams, with short timelines,
adapted to an online format. They also preferred multi-day written home exams over potential
alternatives such as video or podcasts, which none of them had tried before. It should be noted
that they had limited experience with digital options. Student-produced podcast and video
have been used as formative assessment forms at our university [14], but to lesser extent as for-
mative assessment forms. The preference for written home exams over digital options was
thus likely influenced by student’s familiarity with the former since no exams during this time-
period were in the form of podcast or video. Feedback and guidance from academic staff have
been found to be key aspects of study quality, and good feedback contributes to increased
motivation and improved learning outcomes (6). Exam uncertainty causes undue stress, and
thus a key recommendation during the transition to online learning is to ensure that all infor-
mation about exams is communicated to the students clearly and in a timely manner [27].
‘Black screens’ do not necessarily reflect individuals lack of motivation and attention or
embarrassment, but they may reflect a lack of digital training among freshmen or technical
issues, such as poor bandwidth. Broadband bandwidth overload issues and a lack of suitable
equipment will probably not be significant problems in Norway in the future. The students
suggested that both flipped classrooms and live streaming should be used in future online
courses. Flipping the classroom [9] ahead of live streaming, with the possibility for the students
to write down questions during the live streaming or afterward in a seminar, increases flexibil-
ity. Asynchronous tools may be utilised to support students to work at different times. We can-
not overlook the possibility that new students might have needs that differ from those of
senior students in terms of getting accustomed to online education. Nevertheless, our date
indicates that clarification of expectations constitutes an important success criteria for online
teaching, especially when it comes to group work and formative and summative assessment
[4,27].
The closure of campus may have unknown implications for society in both the short and
long term [28–30], including impacts on educational quality and the mental health of students
and academic staff [31]. If students are unable to study effectively for some unknown reason, it
will make online learning ineffective, regardless of educational quality. The situation after the
PLOS ONE Experiences of COVID-19 lockdown among Norwegian students
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250378 August 31, 2021 12 / 16
lockdown in Norway was confusing, and many students lost their jobs and moved back in
with their parents [4]. We did not collect person-sensitive data, and thus we know little about
these students’ circumstances. The dropout rate remained nearly unchanged among these stu-
dents as compared to previous years. Being a small-sized education, the staff were able to fol-
low-up each student individually using digital videoconference tools, such as Zoom and
Teams. In the future, more sustainable approaches should be developed, for example, by
increasing peer-to-peer interactions and through mentoring programs [1]. Reducing dropout
and increasing completion rates was a strategic goal for higher education before the lockdown
[29], and we do not know the impact of the lockdown on future dropout and completion rates.
The high dropout rate from Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) has been a major con-
cern of researchers and educators over the years [32]. Although some universities worldwide
had already started offering MOOC-based undergraduate degrees before the COVID-19 pan-
demic [32], most MOOCs do not lead to degrees. The online courses offered in spring 2020
after the lockdown were mandatory courses leading to degrees, and thus they were not directly
comparable to the voluntary MOOCs. However, such issues are premature for consideration
in the present study. OsloMet is currently participating both in the future ‘The COVID-19
Multi-Country Student Well-being Study’[33] and the ‘Corona and Campus’ study [34]. The
‘Corona and Campus’ study has secondary outcomes related to teaching satisfaction and learn-
ing outcomes, and such data will have the power to inform future decision-making [30]. How-
ever, the present data were collected shortly after the national lockdown due to the COVID-19
pandemic on aspects of digitalisation relevant to the (post)-pandemic situation.
Strengths and weaknesses of the study
This study has several strengths. The most important strength is data collection shortly after a
national lockdown due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The combined use of both quantitative
and qualitative approaches enabled different perspectives to be captured and adds strength to
the study. The triangulation allowed us to identify aspects more accurately and helped to offset
the weaknesses of each approach alone. Group dynamics in focus group interviews can help
bring out nuances in the data material beyond the answers to the predefined quantitative ques-
tions in the electronic questionnaires [17]. Another strength was the research team consisting
of both external moderators providing objectivity, lack of vested interest and a fresh perspec-
tive, and internal evaluators who were familiar with the education and the students. One limi-
tation is using a questionnaire which was not pre-tested or validated. However, due to time
constraints shortly after campus lockdown following the COVID-19 outbreak, it was not possi-
ble to perform pre-testing or validation of the instruments used in the present study. Many of
the necessary ad hoc changes to the course plans and exams (spring semester 2020) had yet to
be made and decided upon when the present study was initiated, even when the first question-
naire was sent out before Easter 2020. The candidates actual achieved learning outcomes and
working skills are unknown due to limited opportunities to monitor the quality of their work
[4]. We do not consider it to be relevant to repeat the study, or reuse its instruments, since the
acute phase after lockdown is over. PHN is a small-sized education, and the total number of
students were only 79 individuals. The stress associated with the unprecedented situation may
have contributed to a low response rate. Private circumstances such as poor internet connec-
tion, children at home, and lack of an adequate home office may also have contributed to a low
response rate. A low response rate is also a limitation in studies performed in a normal situa-
tion [16]. We cannot rule out selection bias in the sample. The students who volunteered for
the digital focus group interviews were positive and thorough. In particular, they seemed to
reflect on a more general level, not restricted to their own personal situations. However, the
PLOS ONE Experiences of COVID-19 lockdown among Norwegian students
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250378 August 31, 2021 13 / 16
range in age among the study participants was representative for the age range of all PHN stu-
dents, and both bachelor and master students participated in the study. Data are collected
from one single university, and the results might not be representative for large sized educa-
tions. Since the study is exploratory, we had not planned the data collection in order to test
hypotheses. The study seeks to provide a snapshot in time of an evolving situation. Even with
some limiting factors we believe the explorative study offers value since it provides a student
perspective on an unprecedented black-swan event in higher education.
Conclusions
Although they had little previous experience with online education, these students seemed to
adapt quickly to the sudden shift to ad hoc online education due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
The most pressing concerns among students were a lack of social interaction, a feeling of being
alone in their studies, unfit housing situations for home office purposes, including insufficient
data bandwidth, and a sense of reduced motivation and effort. Although our data indicate that
face-to-face contact was greatly missed during this time-period, a thoroughly planned online
course with numerous contact points between teachers and students would likely have been
received more favorably. Finally, the students expressed that they wanted more structure in
future digital courses. Due to the very unusual circumstances experienced both by students
and teachers in the early stages of national lockdown in Norway, we are hesitant to conclude
with regards to students preferences for future online courses.
Supporting information
S1 File. SPSS file questionnaire 1—please see line 154.
(SAV)
S2 File. SPSS file Norwegian questionnaire 1—please see line 154.
(SAV)
S3 File. SPSS file questionnaire 2—please see line 154.
(SAV)
S4 File. SPSS file Norwegian questionnaire 2—please see line 154.
(SAV)
S5 File. Structured interview guide–please see line 145.
(DOCX)
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the participating students and the academic and administra-
tive staff at Oslo Metropolitan University for their contributions.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization: Kari Almendingen, Marianne Sandsmark Morseth.
Data curation: Kari Almendingen, Christine Tørris.
Formal analysis: Marianne Sandsmark Morseth, Eli Gjølstad, Christine Tørris.
Investigation: Kari Almendingen, Marianne Sandsmark Morseth, Eli Gjølstad, Asgeir Brevik,
Christine Tørris.
PLOS ONE Experiences of COVID-19 lockdown among Norwegian students
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250378 August 31, 2021 14 / 16
Methodology: Kari Almendingen, Marianne Sandsmark Morseth, Eli Gjølstad, Asgeir Brevik,
Christine Tørris.
Project administration: Kari Almendingen.
Writing – original draft: Kari Almendingen.
Writing – review & editing: Kari Almendingen, Marianne Sandsmark Morseth, Eli Gjølstad,
Asgeir Brevik, Christine Tørris.
References 1. Crawford J, Butler-Henderson K, Rudolph J, Malkawi B, Glowatz M, Burton R, et al. COVID-19: 20
countries’ higher education intra-period digital pedagogy responses. Journal of Applied Learning &
Teaching. 2020; 3(1):1–20.
2. UNESCO. Education: From disruption to recovery 2020 [09/09/2020]. Available from: https://en.
unesco.org/covid19/educationresponse.
3. Tria JZ. The COVID-19 Pandemic through the Lens of Education in the Philippines: The New Normal.
International Journal of Pedagogical Development and Lifelong Learning. 2020;1. https://doi.org/10.
30935/ijpdll/8311.
4. Langford M, Damşa C. Online Teaching in the Time of COVID-19: Academic Teachers’ Experience in
Norway Centre for Experiential Legal Learning (CELL), University of Oslo2020 [cited 2020].
5. Lillejord S, Børte K. Learning and Teaching With Technology in Higher Education—a systematic review.
2018.
6. Vygotsky LS. Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes. London: Harvard
University Press UK: Gyldendal Akademisk; 1978.
7. Ministry of Education and Research. Quality Culture in Higher Education 2017.
8. Oslo Metropolitian University. The digital university of the future: Strategy for digital transformation
2018–2024 2018 [17/11/2019]. Available from: https://ansatt.oslomet.no/documents/585743/
77463421/Strategy+for+digital+transformation.pdf.
9. Evans L, Vanden Bosch ML, Harrington S, Schoofs N, Coviak C. Flipping the Classroom in Health Care
Higher Education: A Systematic Review. Nurse educator. 2019; 44(2):74–8. Epub 2018/07/18. https://
doi.org/10.1097/NNE.0000000000000554 PMID: 30015680.
10. Sangster A, Stoner G, Flood B. Insights into accounting education in a COVID-19 world. Accounting
Education. 2020; 29(5):431–562. https://doi.org/10.1080/09639284.2020.1808487
11. Sisk K CA, Cullinen K Guide for Developing and Enhancing Skills in Public Health and Community Nutri-
tion. Definitions Related to Public Health Nutrition and Community Nutrition 2018 [09/09/2020]. 3rd Ed:
[Available from: https://asphn.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Guide-for-Developing-and-Enhancing-
Skills-in-Public-Health-and-Community-Nutrition.pdf.
12. Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics Definition of Terms List.
Approved by Definition of Terms Task Force Quality Management Committee 2020 May 8, 2020 Report
No.
13. Almendingen K, Saltyte-Benth J., Molin M. Large Scale Blended Learning Design in an Interprofes-
sional Undergraduate Course in Norway: Context Description and Supervisors’ Perspective. The Jour-
nal of Research in Interprofessional Practice and Education (JRIPE) 2021; In press.
14. Almendingen K, Molin M, Šaltytė Benth J. Large-scale Blended Learning Design in an Undergraduate
Interprofessional Course in Norway: Students’ Perspectives from an exploratory study The Journal of
Research in Interprofessional Practice and Education (JRIPE) 2021; In press.
15. Nettskjema: University of Oslo; 2020. Available from: https://www.uio.no/english/services/it/adm-
services/nettskjema/.
16. The Norwegian Agency for Quality Assurance in Education. The students’ judgement 2018 [09/09/
2019]. Available from: https://www.nokut.no/en/news/the-students-judgement/.
17. Malterud K. Malterud K. Systematic text condensation: a strategy for qualitative analysis. Scandinavian
journal of public health. 2012; 40(8):795–805. https://doi.org/10.1177/1403494812465030 PMID:
23221918
18. Rutine for bruk av Zoom i forskningsintervjuer (in Norwegian) Oslo Metropolitian University2020 [10/09/
2020].
PLOS ONE Experiences of COVID-19 lockdown among Norwegian students
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250378 August 31, 2021 15 / 16
19. Quality Matters online education 2021 [09/02/2021]. Available from: https://www.qualitymatters.org/
index.php/.
20. Røe Y,Ødegaard NB, Dahl-Michelsen T. Flipping the classroom in physiotherapy education: experi-
ences, opportunities and challenges. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy. 2018; 13(4):24–37. https://doi.
org/10.18261/issn.1891-943x-2018-04-03 ER.
21. Almendingen K, Sparboe-Nilsen B, Gravdal LK, Šaltytė Benth J. Interprofessional learning in a large-
scale blended learning course among Norwegian teacher education, health and social care students
nine weeks ahead of the Covid-19 forced digitalisation due to campus lockdown. PlOS ONE Under
review since September 2020. 2021.
22. Nishida C, Uauy R, Kumanyika S, Shetty P. The Joint WHO/FAO Expert Consultation on diet, nutrition
and the prevention of chronic diseases: process, product and policy implications. Public Health Nutri-
tion. 2004; 7(1a):245–50. Epub 2007/01/02. https://doi.org/10.1079/phn2003592 PMID: 14972063
23. Afshin A, Sur PJ, Fay KA, Cornaby L, Ferrara G, Salama JS, et al. Health effects of dietary risks in 195
countries, 1990–2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. The Lancet.
2019; 393(10184):1958–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(19)30041-8 PMID: 30954305
24. Ministry of Health and Care Services. The primary health and care services of tomorrow–localised and
integrated. Oslo: Ministry of Health and Care Services; 2015.
25. Bao W. COVID-19 and online teaching in higher education: A case study of Peking University. Human
Behavior and Emerging Technologies. 2020; 2(2):113–5. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbe2.191 PMID:
32510042
26. Damşa C, de Lange T, Elken M, Esterhazy R, Fossland T, Frølich N, et al. Quality in Norwegian Higher
Education: A review of research on aspects affecting student learning. 2015.
27. Hjelsvold R, Lorås M, Bahmani A, Nykvist SS, Krokan A. First impressions from educators as NTNU
transitions to an online only mode of learning 2020 [20/02/2021]. Available from: https://www.
researchgate.net/project/Research-on-Learning-Activities-During-the-Covid-19-Pandemic.
28. Nicola M, Alsafi Z, Sohrabi C, Kerwan A, Al-Jabir A, Iosifidis C, et al. The socio-economic implications
of the coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19): A review. International Journal of Surgery. 2020; 78:185–93.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2020.04.018 PMID: 32305533
29. Lancet. Research and higher education in the time of COVID-19. The Lancet. 2020; 396(10251):583.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31818-3 PMID: 32861293
30. McCartney M. BMJ Opinion2020. [cited 2020]. Available from: https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2020/08/28/
margaret-mccartney-we-need-better-evidence-on-non-drug-interventions-for-covid-19/?fbclid=
IwAR1jFbFk7lKcrOxIkxo7gaNJM3II6nDia_W6hXs4VWF_DI2vllS9jEqJ-vI.
31. Sahu P. Closure of Universities Due to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): Impact on Education
and Mental Health of Students and Academic Staff. Cureus. 2020; 12(4):e7541–e. https://doi.org/10.
7759/cureus.7541 PMID: 32377489.
32. Goopio J, Cheung C. The MOOC dropout phenomenon and retention strategies. Journal of Teaching in
Travel & Tourism. 2020:1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/15313220.2020.1809050
33. University of Antwerpen. The COVID-19 Multi-Country Student Well-being Study Netherlands2020 [29/
08/2020]. Available from: https://www.uantwerpen.be/en/research-groups/centre-population-family-
health/research2/covid-19-internation/.
34. ClinicalTrials.gov. Assocation Between In-person Instruction and COVID-19 Risk (Campus&Corona)
ClinicalTrials.gov2020 [30/8/2020].
PLOS ONE Experiences of COVID-19 lockdown among Norwegian students
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250378 August 31, 2021 16 / 16
