The impact of the COVID‐19 lockdown on the learning experiences of optometry students at a South African university
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background. Optometry students are primarily trained using didactic lectures, supported by essential in‐person practical training to enable transfer of clinical skills. However, the COVID‐19 pandemic and subsequent lockdown measures forced universities worldwide to move to online learning. The disruption to teaching and learning caused by lockdown measures significantly changed the way optometry students experienced both teaching and learning.
Objective. To understand optometry students’ learning experiences during the COVID‐19 lockdown.
Methods. This qualitative study employed purposive sampling to explore the learning experiences of optometry students during the COVID‐19 lockdown. Data were collected through virtual focus group interviews, utilising a semi‐structured interview guide. Data were anonymised, transcribed and thematically analysed using conventional content analysis.
Results. A total of 13 students in the second, third and fourth years of study participated in the study. The analysis revealed four key themes, namely: ‘Personal and peripheral influences’, ‘Environmental and organisational limitations’, ‘Direct barriers to the new online teaching and learning platform’ and ‘Student perceptions on the way forward for teaching and learning’.
Conclusion. Preparedness for abrupt shifts to online learning is crucial for maintaining quality learning outcomes. In optometry a hybrid approach that integrates both online learning with in‐person training is recommended during times of major disruptions, to ensure that essential clinical competence is developed and that students have continued access to peer support.
Downloads
Article Details
Issue
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
The AJHPE is published under an Attribution-Non Commercial International Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC 4.0) License. Under this license, authors agree to make articles available to users, without permission or fees, for any lawful, non-commercial purpose. Users may read, copy, or re-use published content as long as the author and original place of publication are properly cited.
Exceptions to this license model is allowed for UKRI and research funded by organisations requiring that research be published open-access without embargo, under a CC-BY licence. As per the journals archiving policy, authors are permitted to self-archive the author-accepted manuscript (AAM) in a repository.
How to Cite
References
1. Nayak J, Mishra M, Naik B, Swapnarekha H, Cengiz K, Shanmuganathan V. An impact study of COVID‐19 on six different industries: Automobile, energy and power, agriculture, education, travel and tourism and consumer electronics. Expert Syst 2022;39(3):e12677. doi: 10.1111/exsy.12677
2. Hlatshwayo M. Online learning during the South African COVID‐19 lockdown: University students left to their own devices. Educ Change 2022;26:1‐23. https://doi.org/10.25159/1947‐9417/11155
3. Aulakh J, Wahab H, Richards C, Bidaisee S, Patel R. Self‐directed learning versus traditional didactic learning in undergraduate medical education: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. BMC Med Educ 2025;25(70): 1‐10. doi: 10.1186/s12909‐024‐06449‐0
4. May T, Perry B. Reflexivity: A Critical Guide. London: Sage; 2017.
5. Giorgi A. The Descriptive Phenomenological Method in Psychology: A Modified Husserlian Approach.
Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press; 2009.
6. Moustakas CE. Phenomenological Research Methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 1994.
7. Sandelowski M. Whatever happened to qualitative description? Res Nurs Health 2000;23:334‐340. https://doi.
org/10.1002/1098‐240X(200008)23:4<334::AID‐NUR9>3.0.CO;2‐G
8. Neergaard MA, Olesen F, Andersen RS, Søndergaard J. Qualitative description – the poor cousin of health research? BMC Med Res Methodol 2009;9(1). Doi: 10.1186/1471‐2288‐9‐52
9. Fusch PI, Ness LR. Are we there yet? Data saturation in qualitative research. Qual Rep 2015;20(9):1408‐1416. 10. Nowell LS, Norris JM, White DE, Moules NJ. Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. Int
J Qual Methods 2017;16(1):1‐12. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691773
11. Lincoln YS, Guba EG. Naturalistic Inquiry. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 1985.
12. Creswell JW. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. 3rd ed. Thousand
Oaks: Sage Publications; 2009.
13. Byrne D. A worked example of Braun and Clarke’s approach to reflexive thematic analysis. Qual Quant
2022;56(3):1391‐1412. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135‐021‐01182‐y
14. Rahiem MDH. Remaining motivated despite the limitations: University students’ learning propensity during the
COVID‐19 pandemic. Child Youth Serv Rev 2021;120: 1‐14.
15. Wissmath B, Mast FW, Kraus F, Weibel D. Understanding the psychological impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic
and containment measures: An empirical model of stress. PLoS One 2021;16(7):e0254883. https://doi. org/10.1371/journal.pone.0254883
16. Shao Y, Kang S, Lu Q, Zhang C, Li R. How peer relationships affect academic achievement among junior high school students: The chain mediating roles of learning motivation and learning engagement. BMC Psychol 2024;12(1): 1‐12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359‐024‐01780‐z
17. Prabahar B, Jerome B, Kaviarasu JS, Mariadoss S, Anbarasu M, Xavier BS. The impact of teacher leadership traits on student success: A correlational study. Indian J Inf Sources Serv 2024;14(4):141‐146. https://doi.org/10.51983/ ijiss‐2024.14.4.22
18. Galvin R. Peer support: Enhancing the online learning experience. Int J Innov Learn 2012;12(1):41‐53. DOI:10.1504/IJIL.2012.047309
19. Bakar R. The effect of learning motivation on students’ productive competencies in vocational high school, West Sumatra. Int J Asian Soc Sci 2014;4(6):722‐732.
20. Garbe A, Ogurlu U, Logan N, Cook P. COVID‐19 and remote learning: Experiences of parents with children during the pandemic. Am J Qual Res 2020;4(3):45‐65. https://doi.org/10.29333/ajqr/8471
21. Arhimah T, Thompson M, Cudjoe‐Mensah YM. Disparities in access to educational technology and its impact on performance across socio‐economic and racial groups in U.S. public schools. Int J Financ Res Manag Sci 2025;5(2):1‐6. https://doi.org/10.56355/ijfrms.2025.5.2.0021
22. Segooa RF, Moodley VR. Optometry student clinical practice at public health facilities: A systematic review. Health SA Gesondheid 2024;29:2441. DOI: 10.4102/hsag.v29i0.2441
23. Nenko Y, Kybalna N, Snisarenko Y. The COVID‐19 distance learning: Insight from Ukrainian students. Braz Sci J Rural Educ 2020;5:1‐19. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.20873/uft.rbec.e8925
24. James T, Toth G, Tomlins M, Kumar B, Bond K. Digital disruption in the COVID‐19 era: The impact on learning and students’ ability to cope with study in an unknown world. Student Success 2021;12(3):84‐95. https://doi. org/10.5204/ssj.1784
25. Kanthan NC, Balraj BM. Challenges faced by lecturers in adapting to online teaching during COVID‐19: A focus on the community of inquiry framework. Int J Acad Res Bus Soc Sci 2025;15(1): 177‐184. DOI:10.6007/IJARBSS/ v15‐i1/24249
26. Hasnat MA, Kabir SMA. Online assessment challenges during the pandemic: Lessons learned from Bangladesh for the future. Int J Innov Online Educ 2024;8(1):29‐49. DOI: 10.1615/IntJInnovOnlineEdu.2024049568
27. El‐Soussi A. The shift from face‐to‐face to online teaching due to COVID‐19: Its impact on higher education faculty’s professional identity. Int J Educ Res Open 2022;3:100139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2022.100139
28. Ferrel MN, Ryan JJ. The impact of COVID‐19 on medical education. Cureus 2020;12(3):1‐3. DOI: 10.7759/ cureus.7492
29. Kovačević M, Ivanović N, Protić A, Milenković D, Mandinić Z, Puzović D, et al. Health sciences students’ perspectives on online teaching and learning: Extending the implications beyond the COVID‐19 pandemic. Eur J Educ 2024;59(3):e12660. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12660
30. Anis M. Teacher professional development in the digital age: Addressing the evolving needs post‐COVID. Int J Multidiscip Res 2024;6(1):1. https://doi.org/10.36948/ijfmr.2024.v06i01.12386
31. Hepburn L, Beamish W. Influences on proactive classroom management: Views of teachers in government secondary schools, Queensland. Improving Schools 2020;23:33‐46. https://doi.org/10.1177/1365480219886148
32. Sung TC, Shih HI, Kawaguchi T, Chi CH, Hsu HC. Tracking clinical competency growth: A longitudinal study of medical students in a multidisciplinary emergency department internship program. J Multidiscip Healthc 2025;18:3877‐3890. DOI: 10.2147/JMDH.S530887
33. Müller C, Mildenberger T, Steingruber D. Learning effectiveness of a flexible learning study programme in a blended learning design: Why are some courses more effective than others? Int J Educ Technol High Educ 2023;20(1):10. DOI: 10.1186/s41239‐022‐00379‐x
34. Hodges CB, Moore S, Lockee BB, Trust T, Bond MA. The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. In: Handbook of Research in Online Learning: Insights and Advances. 2024:511‐522. https:// doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.921332