In the past decade, electronic learning has increased in popularity. Technology-enhanced learning is the progressive area for researching (studying, investigation). The information age provides uneclipsed feasibilities for the educational process, such as communication, exchange of information, having up-to-date knowledge. Further growth in demand for e-learning is expected. The combination of digital technologies and resources provides opportunities to improve the quality of learning and teaching. The paper focuses on the experience of organizing e-learning of course “Analytical Chemistry” in Bogomolets National Medical University for 488 students (93 students of full-time education and 395 students of part-time education) of the second year of study of the pharmaceutical faculty using tools of the Moodle and other information technology (Zoom, pre-recorded video lectures, and laboratory works, social networks). The purpose of this article is to analyze and evaluate the information technology learning process that is required during the COVID-19 pandemic. An important achievement of this article is the creation of a well-structured Analytical Chemistry online course at the platform LIKAR_NMU. The evaluation of students’ performance shows that online learning, which was proposed, can be estimated as effective in obtaining necessary skills and knowledge in Analytical Chemistry. The survey data illustrates that pre-recorded video lectures and live lectures are equally effective (according to the following criteria: the ability to concentrate, the intelligibility of content, degree of interest aroused, and lecture overall). And social networks (messengers Viber, Telegram, and WhatsApp) are effective tools for solving the accompanying problems related to the subject of Analytical Chemistry.
1. Ucar H, Bozkurt A. Flipped classroom 2.0: Producing and synthesizing the knowledge. ENAD. 2018;6(3):143-57.
2. Aydin M, Okmen B, Sahin S, Kilic A. The meta-analysis of the studies about the effects of flipped learning on students’ achievement. Turk Online J Distance Educ. 2020;22(1):33-51.
3. Valverde-Berrocoso J, Garrido-Arroyo M del C, Burgos-Videla C, Morales-Cevallos MB. Trends in Educational Research about e-Learning: A Systematic Literature Review (2009−2018). Sustainability. 2020;12(12):5153-76. doi:10.3390/su12125153
4. Hubackova S. History and perspectives of e-learning. Procedia Soc Behav Sci. 2015;191:1187-90. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.594
5. Kentnor HE. Distance education and the evolution and the evolution of online learning in the United States. Curr Teach Dialogue. 2015;17(1&2):21-31.
6. Bobrytska VI, Reva TD, Protska SM, Chkhalo OM. Effectiveness and stakeholders’ perceptions of the integration of automated e-learning courses into vocational education programmes in universities in Ukraine. Int J Learn, Teach Educ Res. 2020;19(5):27-46.
7. Selvaraj A, Radhin V, Nithin KA, Benson N, Mathew AJ. Effect of pandemic based online education on teaching and learning system. Int J Educ Dev. 2021;85:102444. doi:10.1016/j.ijedudev.2021.102444
8. Sindiani AM, Obeidat N, Alshdaifat E, Elsalem L, Alwani MM, Rawashdeh H. Distance education during the COVID-19 outbreak: a cross-sectional study among medical students in North of Jordan. Ann Med Surg. 2020;59:186-94. doi:10.1016/j.amsu.2020.09.036
9. Braun LW, Correa APB, Martins MD, Umpierre RN, Wagner VP, Martins MAT, et al. A distance learning course improves diagnostic abilities and self-efficacy for oral mucosal lesions. Oral Surg, Oral Med, Oral Pathol, Oral Radiol. 2020;130(3):275. doi:10.1016/j.oooo.2020.04.753
10. Matei A, Vrabie C. E-learning platforms supporting the educational effectiveness of distance learning programmes: a comparative study in administrative sciences. Procedia Soc Behav Sci. 2013;93:526-530. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.09.233
11. Hilburh R, Patel N, Ambruso S, Biewald MA, Farouk SS. Medical education during the coronavirus disease-2019 pandemic: learning from a distance. Adv Chronic Kidney Dis. 2020;27(5):412-7. doi:10.1053/j.ackd.2020.05.017
12. Harfouche AL, Nakhle F. Creating bioethics distance learning through virtual reality. Trends Biotechnol. 2020;38(11):1187-92. doi:10.1016/j.tibtech.2020.05.005
13. Junior AJM, Pauna HF. Distance learning and telemedicine in the area of Otorhinolaryngology: lessons in times of pandemic. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2020;86(3):271-2. doi:10.1016/j.bjorl.2020.03.003
14. Stefanovic M. The objectives, architectures, and effects of distance learning laboratories for industrial engineering education. Comput. Educ. 2013;69:250-62. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.011
15. Martin F, Sun T, Westine CD. A systematic review of research on online teaching and learning from 2009 to 2018. Comput Educ, 2020;159:1-17. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104009
16. Berge Z, Mrozowski S. Review of research in distance education, 1990 to 1999. Am J Distance Educ. 2001;15(3):5-19. doi:10.1080/08923640109527090
17. Tallent-Runnels MK, Thomas JA, Lan WY, Cooper S, Ahern TC, Shaw SM, et al. Teaching courses online: a review of the research. Rev Educ Res. 2006;76(1):93-135. doi:10.3102/00346543076001093
18. Zawacki-Richter O, Backer E, Vogt S. Review of distance education research (2000 to 2008): Analysis of research areas, methods, and authorship patterns. Int Rev Res Open Distrib Learn. 2009;10(6):21-50. doi:10.19173/irrodl.v10i6.741
19. Nennig HT, Idarraga KL, Salzer LD, Bleske-Rechek A, Theisen RM. Comparison of student attitudes and performance in an online and a face-to-face inorganic chemistry course. Chem Educ Res Pract. 2020:21(1):168-77. doi:10.1039/C9RP00112C
20. Weaver GC, Green K, Rahman A, Epp E. An Investigation of Online and Face-to-Face Communication in General Chemistry. Int J Scholarsh Teach Learn. 2009;3(1):1-22. doi:10.20429/ijsotl.2009.030118
21. Gulacar O, Damkaci F, Bowman CA. Comparative Study of an Online and a Face-to-Face Chemistry Course. J Interact Online Learn. 2013;12(1):27-40.
22. Kuchyn IL, Vlasenko OM, Gashenko IA, Mykytenko PV, Kucherenko II. Creating the informational and educational environment of the University based on the distance learning platform LIKAR_NMU. Arch Pharm Pract. 2021;12(2):66-74. doi:10.51847/5zZerOAbwA
23. Aldibab A, Chowdhury H, Kootsookos A, Alam F, Allhibi H. Utilization of Learning Management Systems (LMSs) in higher education system: A case review for Saudi Arabia. Energy Procedia. 2019;160:731-7. doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2019.02.186
24. De Mario C, Limongelli C, Sciarrone F, Temperini M. MoodleREC: A recommendation system for creating courses using the Moodle e-learning platform. Comput Hum Behav. 2020;104:106168. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2019.106168
25. Nizhenkovska I, Reva T, Chkhalo O, Holovchenko O. Technology-driven self-directed learning of graduate pharmaceutists: adding value through entrepreneurship. Int J Learn Teach Educ Res. 2020;19(6):111-26.
26. Reva TD. Competency-based approach in teaching Chemistry to the future pharmacists: Theoretical and methodological framework [monograph]. Ed. supervisor: I.V. Nizhenkovskaya, Kyiv, Ukraine: Edelweiss Publishing Company; 2017. 456 p.
27. Reva T, Kucherenko I, Nizhenkovska I, Stuchynska N, Konovalova L, Burmaka O, et al. Digital component of professional competence of masters of Pharmacy in the framework of blended learning. Arch Pharm Pract. 2021;12(1):98-102. doi:10.51847/avsEptmZsN