Abstract
This article delves into emergency remote education in higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic. Building on 82 interviews with students, teachers, and other staff at 10 education programmes in the natural and social sciences and humanities at Uppsala University, Sweden, and drawing on Bourdieu's field concept, we analysed various stances regarding emergency remote education. Our analysis revealed four main strategies: (1) Though emergency remote education called for significant changes, the education programmes resisted transformation; (2) Emergency remote education necessitated significant changes, which the education programmes adapted to; (3) Emergency remote education demanded relatively small changes, yet the programmes were inclined to undergo larger transformations; and (4) Even if emergency remote education required only minor adjustments, the programmes resisted those changes. These strategies should be interpreted in the context of practical and organisational challenges within the programmes, and, most importantly, in relation to the programmes’ positions within the field of higher education.
Introduction
‘Hundreds of law students in Uppsala will write on-site invigilated exams for several hours – just when the spread of infection is expected to peak in mid-January’ (Hansson, 2022). When Swedish media reported on this ‘super spreader event’ in the beginning of January 2022, the world had been put on pause for nearly two years due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In an act of collective protest, over 1000 law students signed a petition against the Uppsala University Law Programme's decision to demand on-site examinations, despite the risk this meant for people's health. How was it possible for some at the university, such as those in charge of the Law Programme, to strongly resist societal change, while the rest of society and most other university programmes were trying to adjust their practices to the circumstances of the crisis?
In the beginning of 2020, universities worldwide transitioned from on-site to digital education formats in response to the COVID-19 pandemic which, caused by the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, brought about unprecedented challenges to public health and society worldwide (Cucinotta and Maurizio Vanelli, 2020). The rapid shift to emergency remote education necessitated novel solutions for lectures, seminars, and examinations (Neuwirth et al., 2021). Although the transition from on-site to digital education has garnered significant attention from researchers, there remains a lacuna in the literature analysing the implications of this transition for various education programmes (Koh and Daniel, 2022). The purpose of this paper is to explore and explain strategies pertaining to emergency remote education – to which higher education had to transition during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 – among teachers and students from different education programmes at Uppsala University in Sweden.
Sweden's approach to the COVID-19 pandemic was ‘a remarkable exception’ (Bouckaert et al., 2020), in Europe. While other European countries locked down society, Sweden chose to keep open shops, restaurants and cafés, and primary and lower secondary schools. The Swedish strategy was built on recommendations to keep distance (Coronakommissionen, 2021: 234–237). In contrast to the general openness, Swedish universities were compelled to suddenly and without time for preparation transition to emergency remote education. This makes Swedish higher education a unique and valuable site for studying how institutions respond to rapid disruption. Moreover, Swedish higher education presents a unique case for studying emergency remote education. According to OECD (2018: 13–15), Sweden is one of the most digitalised countries in the world, excelling in digital literacy, competence and access to digital media and infrastructure. Finally, it has to be stressed that Uppsala University forms a specific case in the field of higher education as it has a long history of decentralised steering. It sets collegiate boards high and is one of the most collegiate higher education institutions in Sweden (Ahlbäck Öberg and Boberg, 2022: 180). Since decisions on education and research at the university in many aspects are decentralised to the faculties and the departments, a crisis such as the COVID-19 pandemic is handled in various ways. Thus, even if a general decision was made by the vice-chancellor to follow the recommendations and guidelines by The Public Health Agency of Sweden (Folkhälsomyndigheten) and shift to distance teaching and examination, it was the faculties and departments that were responsible for the implementation (Uppsala University, 2020a). This implies that Uppsala University offers a valuable case for examining programme-level differences in strategies, responses, and actions. While grounded in the Swedish context, this study addresses broader international concerns by demonstrating how pre-existing structures in higher education shaped programme strategies. The structure of the Swedish field of higher education resonates with field dynamics in other countries (e.g., Bourdieu, 1996; Gripsrud et al., 2011; Thomsen, 2008), offering insights into how and why actors within higher education globally adapt, defend, or redefine educational practice in times of systemic change.
Various terms have been used in the literature to denote the shift from on-site education to digital forms of education during the pandemic, such as ‘emergency remote teaching’ (Alvarez Jr, 2020: 144), ‘emergency online teaching’ (Lorenza and Carter, 2021: 1), ‘online learning’ (Amzalag et al., 2021: 243), ‘remote teaching’ (van der Spoel et al., 2020: 223), ‘remote instruction’ (Meleo-Erwin et al., 2021: 1), or simply ‘distance education’ (Jacques et al., 2020: 120; Lorenza and Carter, 2021: 2). These terms are often used interchangeably, however, we have opted to use the term ‘emergency remote education’ (Oliviera et al., 2021: 1357). This term encompasses both teaching and learning and, above all, it underscores that the digital modes of education implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic differed from traditional distance education (Lorenza and Carter, 2021: 1) because they were developed in response to an emergency situation, where students and teachers had not chosen to study and teach remotely. The article begins with an account of previous research on emergency remote education within higher education, introduces the theoretical framework, and describes methods and data. Subsequently, the empirical analysis is presented in four sections, each corresponding to one of the four strategies regarding emergency remote education identified in our analysis. The conclusion discusses the study's contribution to research on emergency remote education, and moves on to a broader discussion on the relationship between societal change and education.
Previous research on emergency remote education in higher education during COVID-19
Studies on distance education in higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic highlight social, pedagogical, practical, and ethical issues arising from the emergency demands of the crisis. Most studies analyse the transition from on-campus to online education during the pandemic as a case study to assess the benefits and challenges of distance education, its viability as an alternative to traditional on-campus practices, and how it could or should be implemented in the future (e.g., Hasan and Khan, 2020: 211; Oliviera et al., 2021: 1357; Zawacki-Richter, 2021: 218). Some focus on particular groups or contexts, such as students’ (e.g., Alvarez Jr, 2020: 144) or teachers’ (e.g., van der Spoel et al., 2020: 623) experiences, or how the transition was received within a particular programme, institution, or discipline (e.g., Jacques et al., 2020: 120). Other studies have used the pandemic situation to compare differences in experiences and responses to the demands of societal change. Such studies compare students and teachers (Amzalag et al., 2021: 243), or different types of courses (Iglesias-Pradas et al., 2021: 1), institutions (Lorenza and Carter, 2021: 1), or countries (Lopez et al., 2021: 404). Several of these comparative studies have focused on digital inequalities concerning power, accessibility, affordability and support (Williamson et al., 2020: 109), sometimes with a particular focus on the disadvantaged, such as students with disabilities (Meleo-Erwin et al., 2021: 1).
Few studies have placed the comparison between education programmes at the centre of the analysis. Those that have illustrate that staff working within different educational settings (such as within different programmes) were, to varying degrees, prepared to meet the transitional demands. Iglesias-Pradas et al. (2021: 9–10) point out that there are several, both organisational and individual, factors affecting this degree of preparedness which relate to everyday educational practice, digital access and competence, bureaucracy, communication, and the flexibility to meet differences in student demands. Beyond variations in such practical factors, Lopez et al. (2021: 409) add that education programmes had varying attitudes towards the changes that were required, especially when deciding on new forms of surveillance to prevent cheating during digital examinations. Meanwhile, Ali (2020: 19) concludes in a meta-study that ‘technology is never neutral’, while arguing that the topic of transitioning to distance education is heavily politicised, involving various attempts at resistance in different institutional contexts from agents who have been critical of the transition from face-to-face learning. Research thus indicates two dimensions within which the differences between education programmes’ responses to emergency remote education take place. One is practical, concerned with various degrees of preparedness and capacity for change. The other is normative, relating to the willingness vis-à-vis resistance to make the necessary changes. None of these studies, however, have attempted to explain why education programmes steer in one or the other direction in these dimensions.
Field approach to emergency remote education
In our analysis of emergency remote education across various education programmes at Uppsala University in Sweden, we draw on Bourdieu's field concept. Fields are structured spaces in society, each governed by their own norms, laws, and rules. Within these fields, actors engage in struggles over symbolic capital, which is specific to each respective field. (Bourdieu and Wacquant, 1992: 101). Fields of education are primarily understood as fields of consumption, and the position of a specific programme, course or higher education institution is often determined by the social profile of its students. Fields of education can also be regarded as fields of production, where universities, university colleges, and other higher education institutions, their faculties and departments, organise and provide educational programmes and courses. In Bourdieu's conception of the French field of grandes écoles, a homology is established between the order existing in the social space and the structure of the field of elite institutions (1996: 139). (Along the first axis, the students with most resources are overrepresented at the oldest and most prestigious institutions, while students with smaller quantities of resources, or capital to follow Bourdieu's terminology, are directed towards less prestigious institutions and programmes. The second axis adds a polarisation based on the composition of the students’ parents’ capital, where economic capital is opposed to cultural, represented by a separation of business schools and engineering schools for the economic fractions, and intellectual schools like École Normale Supérieure for the cultural fractions.)
Analyses of the Swedish field of higher education has also included differences between sons and daughters, and the first axis turns out to be gendered, separating higher education for men from higher education for women along the lines of the orientation and content of the studies: Engineering and Natural Sciences for men, Health, Care, and Teaching for women. The second axis forms a capital volume axis, where the students most rich in resources are found to be following longer professional programmes in medicine, law, psychology, and engineering, while students with a working-class origin typically prefer shorter professional programmes in health, care, teaching, business, and engineering. Larger traditional research universities and prestigious professional schools dominate the upper end of the space, opposing newer universities and university colleges at the lower end, where research resources are scarcer. The first two axes taken together form a triangular structure with programmes that attract both men and women with much cultural capital and other resources at the top, and gender segmented programmes that attract men respectively women with few resources at the bottom (Börjesson, 2016: 424). A third dimension distinguishes programmes according to the capital composition of the students’ parents, creating a difference between business and engineering on the one hand, and programmes in the Natural Sciences, the Arts, and the Humanities (Broady and Palme, 1992: 6). Within this broader field structure, Uppsala University occupied a dominant position as one of the oldest and most prestigious universities, and the internal stratification within the university reflected the larger logic of the field of higher education (Börjesson and Broady, 2016).
A field approach to emergency remote learning suggests that a programme's position within the field influences its strategies, with programmes in similar areas often developing comparable approaches, while those in different regions adopt other strategies. Bourdieu's notion of strategy moves beyond a rational-choice model, emphasising how actors engage in both conscious and unconscious practices (Bourdieu, 1996: 272–278). To quote Bourdieu:
To speak of strategies of reproduction is not to say that the strategies to which dominants manifest their tendency to maintain the status quo are the results of rational calculations or even strategic intent. It is merely to register that many practices that are phenomenally very different are objectively organised in such a way that they contribute to the reproduction of the capital at hand, without having been explicitly designed and instituted with this end in mind. (Bourdieu, 1996: 272)
The notion of strategy also aims at capturing that practice often take place in a situation where the future is unknown, and that agents only have limited knowledge of their circumstances. During the pandemic, university staff had to make rapid decisions under uncertainty. Bourdieu's concepts help illuminate these responses as situated practices, shaped by each education programme's position and accumulated assets, revealing the implicit logics and assumptions at play. Furthermore, the pandemic can be understood as a crisis in the field, that challenges the doxa, that is, the taken-for-granted order of the world. In this case, the doxa concerns both the hierarchical structure of power within the university field and the nature of academic practices (how lectures, seminars, examinations, cheating regulations, and so on, are performed) which are determined by these structures. In a crisis, the hierarchy of the field might be challenged, and with it, the doxa concerning field practices. We examine how dominant actors adopted orthodox positions, defending the pre-pandemic structure in the field, while dominated actors developed more heterodox positions (Bourdieu, 1977: 164), that challenged the established order.
Finally, fields are relatively autonomous to the outer world, and the degree of autonomy varies within the field. In any given field, dominant and subordinate positions are determined based on the distribution of various forms of capital. Those in dominant positions often have the resources to influence the ‘rules of the game’ (Bourdieu and Wacquant, 1992: 99), generally aiming to establish rules that preserve their advantages and, consequently, perpetuate existing structures and inertia. These actors tend to be the most autonomous. They also have most to gain from defending the doxa, and often take orthodox positions when the doxa is questioned.
To shed light on the cultivation of specific dispositions in educational programmes, which, as we will show, the digital format was perceived to undermine, we use Bourdieu's concept of habitus. Habitus is a system of ‘durable, transposable dispositions’ (Bourdieu, 1977: 72) that individuals acquire over the course of their life trajectory as they internalise the objective structures of the field. It manifests in a person's tastes and ways of perceiving the world, as well as in bodily expressions such as posture and speech. Education has been shown to be a central site of habitus formation (Darmon, 2013: 15–16)
Four case studies
This article draws on a qualitative study of higher education programmes at Uppsala University, carried out between 2021 and 2022, that is during and shortly after the COVID-19-related restrictions were implemented in higher education in Sweden (Laurin et al., 2022). The data consist of 82 interviews with students, teachers, and other staff covering 10 different programmes within the Human, Social, and Natural Sciences. The selection of programmes to include in the study aimed to cover education programmes with different positions in the Swedish field of higher education. Statistical analysis on the field of higher education in Sweden (Börjesson, 2016) guided us in our choice of sample. Programmes with a strong recruitment among upper middle-class students, typically programmes in medicine, law and civil engineering, were targeted, while the Business Programme, the Teacher's Programme, and the Nursing Programme represented recruitment of those with a lower middle-class and working-class background. Also, both theoretically oriented programmes, such as the Business programme and programmes in the humanities, and profession-oriented programmes, such as medicine, teacher education, nursing, and law, were included. Departing from our Bourdieusian framework, we expected to find different strategies concerning emergency remote education among programmes with various positions in the field of higher education. However, whether and to what extent there were differences, and if so, of what sort, was an empirical question. As detailed below, we identified a pattern characterised by the degree of change required by distance education and the corresponding willingness or resistance to adapt. In order to highlight differences between the programmes, we focus on four programmes in the article: The Medical Programme, the Nursing Programme, the Business Programme, and the Law Programme. These have distinct positions in the field of higher education and demonstrate particularly clear differences in their strategies towards emergency remote education. However, the patterns that the descriptions of these programmes highlight are applicable to the other programmes. For example, the Teacher's Programme, which occupied a similar position in the field of higher education as the Nursing Programme, developed a comparable strategy for emergency remote education. Programmes in the Humanities developed similar strategies as the Business Programme. The strategies of the Civil Engineering Programmes were somewhat less distinct but were signified by rather a high degree of change while at the same time displaying resistance to change. Thus, in some cases, the relationship between a programme's position and its strategy concerning emergency remote education was less clear, but there were no programmes that contradicted the overall pattern.
The topics of the interviews were online teaching and examination, performance, motivation and academic integrity among students, quality, and purpose of the education. The interviews were conducted digitally, and informed consent was also recorded digitally to avoid the spreading of COVID-19. The interviews lasted approximately one hour and were transcribed verbatim. The text maintains participant anonymity without distorting the scholarly meaning. The study was exempt from requiring approval by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority, as it did not involve the handling of sensitive personal data. The staff we interviewed were recruited through contact information on Uppsala University's website, and the students through announcements on student course websites, direct information during lectures, and through snowball sampling. While snowball sampling might risk bias, the use of the other recruitment methods mentioned above helped mitigate this issue.
The interview transcripts were analysed in two steps. First, we examined the 10 education programmes to identify similarities and differences in various aspects of emergency remote education, such as lectures, examinations, performance, and quality perceptions, in order to understand the diverse attitudes toward this mode of education. In the process, we employed several qualitative data analysis strategies, writing jots, categorising, prioritising, coding, and interpreting (Saldaña, 2020: 881–882). We coded the data with both inductive codes (e.g., practical skills training, academic integrity) and deductive codes (e.g., symbolic capital, heterodox position). We constantly kept the programmes’ positions in the field of higher education in mind, and analysed staff and students’ views and expressions in relation to these. Second, we categorised the education programmes on two different continuums. The first continuum represents the degree of change that the distance education called for, ranging from momentous change to minimal alterations. The second continuum represents the willingness respectively resistance to adjust to the distance education, ranging from strong resistance to high willingness to adjust to the distance education. Combining the two continuums generated four different stances towards the emergency remote education that the COVID-19 pandemic prompted. In the analysis, we observed that the stances of the 10 programmes towards emergency remote education tended to correspond to their positions in the field of higher education. This tendency was particularly evident in some of the programmes. To highlight the various strategies towards emergency remote education and the significance of the programmes’ positions, we chose to present four particularly clear cases. Thus, the analysis in the article draws on interviews from the 10 programmes, although we have chosen to focus on four of them. The sub-themes in the four cases emerged from our coding, and were informed by Bourdieusian theory, as reflected in the wording of the sub-headings. We wish to emphasise that the four strategies we outline are not rigid categories, but are rather exemplifications of variances. For example, it is possible that an education programme initially showing strong resistance to emergency remote education later becomes more receptive to digitalisation. Our primary objective is to highlight the contrasting responses – at this specific juncture in time – of education programmes. The main argument is that the different approaches can be understood in relation to the education programmes’ positions in the field of higher education.
Four strategies regarding emergency remote education amid COVID-19
Momentous change and forceful resistance: The medical programme
Occupying a dominant position in the field of higher education and holding considerable symbolic capital, the Medical Programme was both highly affected by the shift to emergency remote education and strongly positioned to defend its practices. When the pandemic began and the government announced restrictions on in-person higher education, teachers in the Medical Programme voiced deep concerns. Some even discussed the possibility of suspending the programme, initially believing that a transition to digital learning would be impossible. ‘We were talking about closing the Medical Programme, pausing the semesters’, one teacher recounted, adding: ‘So that was the sort of doomsday feeling we had’. This strong response reflects the sense that emergency remote education not only represented a technical shift but threatened core practices and, as detailed below, symbolic capital and strong beliefs that underpinned the Medical Programme's position in the field. Ultimately, the Medical Programme was not suspended; like other education programmes, it transitioned to a digital format. However, faculty were highly sceptical of emergency remote education, and made concerted efforts to retain on-site components, despite the pandemic.
Defending the symbolic capital of embodied medical education
The Medical Programme teachers put forward that distance education was particularly undesirable for medical students due to the need for practical training and patient interaction. ‘How could you replace that with digital training?’ one of the teachers rhetorically asked, elaborating, ‘You have to physically feel the patients’ stomachs and listen to their hearts.’ The medical students were also worried about the consequences of missing out on training on-site. ‘There are a lot of concerns about what I am practically missing out on. Will this make me a less skilled doctor?’ one student questioned. These reactions reflect a belief in the field's stakes, as seen in the conviction regarding the irreplaceable value of hands-on training. This investment in embodied practice-based education was further reflected as faculty emphasised their role in shaping ‘good doctors’. One teacher explained that transitioning to a digital format was difficult due to the need for ‘interaction, learning to collaborate and learning to lead and learning to submit’, aspects that he suggested ‘almost belong to upbringing’. The interviews indicated that preparing medical students required not only providing them with technical knowledge but also instilling them with a professional ethos. In addition, teachers stressed the need for on-site assessment of the students’ suitability for medical practice. These critical educational objectives, faculty argued, could not be effectively achieved in a digital format. The teachers’ focus on moral and professional formation suggests a concern with the cultivation of dispositions aligned with the profession, thus contributing to the formation of a medical doctor habitus. Taken together, this stance indicates an effort to protect the symbolic capital attached to traditional embodied medical education, which the digital format was perceived to undermine.
While other programmes fully or almost fully transitioned their laboratory sessions to digital formats, faculty in the Medical Programme applied for – and gained – special permission from the vice-chancellor to conduct many sessions during different semesters on campus, despite the COVID-19 pandemic (Uppsala University, 2020b, 2021). The Medical Programme argued why they needed on-site exams for various courses in a detailed manner.
Reason: Requirements for legally secure and fair individual examination for all participants in a vocational programme without having to rely on uncertain/unauthorised surveillance methods, where cheating actually has occurred. Difficult to conduct remote exams with a mixture of complex essay questions and multiple choice questions on detailed knowledge. (Uppsala University, 2021: 27)
This distinct response reflects the Medical Programme's strong position in the field, which gave it autonomy and the capacity to challenge externally imposed changes in defence of its established practices, and the symbolic capital attached to the programme and the profession.
Capacity constraints
While the Medical Programme had an abundance of symbolic capital and occupied a dominant position in the field of higher education, its staff were also constrained by lack of certain capacities that were more readily available in some of the other programmes. One such capacity was digital proficiency among the faculty; the Medical Programme had made minimal use of digital systems prior to the pandemic. One of the teachers described the hard work that the transition to a digital format demanded: The effort […] in the spring semester of 2020 was quite inhumane. You will surely, from everyone who has been involved […], be able to sense a certain despair about how frankly terrible it was to transition from having a known structure where you meet the students, to having the same structure fixed at a distance. […] Just […] the purely technical stuff that none of us had even heard of before. The technology boom we were forced into was absolutely heroic […]. I can almost cry when I think about it. (Teacher, Medical Programme)
Defending embodied commitment to the profession's values
At the time of our study, a prevalent method used to deter cheating during digital examinations in higher education involved tailoring questions that were difficult for students to quickly search for online. However, faculty in the Medical Programme argued strongly that such a strategy was not applicable to their context. They emphasised the necessity of asking questions that focused on specific facts, even if such information was easily accessible on the internet. ‘There's a wealth of basic knowledge that we require students to know. You can’t simply bypass that to ask more reflective questions’, stated one faculty member. The teacher underscored the importance of students knowing anatomical terminology, for example, asserting, ‘You have to know what every body part is called and how they function’. Given these constraints, faculty in the Medical Programme believed it was unfeasible to modify exam questions to deter cheating while still retaining a focus on essential facts. Concurrently, there was concern about the potential for student dishonesty. To balance the need for factual examination questions – ones easily verifiable online – with the mandates for preventing COVID-19 spread and complying with governmental guidelines, the decision was made to administer exams in students’ homes under video surveillance. Some faculty members, who also served as practicing physicians, temporarily left their clinical duties to monitor these exams. Students were monitored via their smartphones while completing the exams on their home computers, a process that required significant resources. The problem was that if students write their exams at home, they can google the answers […]. So that the rule of law is really low […] Then we developed the idea that … they should set up their phone so that we could monitor them, and then there were 10 of us teachers watching 10 students each. So, the examination situation changes from a situation with just me, the examiner, walking around the exam room with my hands on my back looking a bit stern, to 10 senior doctors […] who devoted a working day. That's a lot of money and loss of productivity. (Teacher, Medical Programme) There were some protests from the students […]. They went to the press and argued that it was wrong of us to hold in-person exams. […] There was quite a bit of coverage in the local media, protest letters to various university officials as well, and appeals. The matter was discussed at a higher level within the Medical Programme, and the programme committee addressed the issue. They felt it was important that to ensure quality of the examinations in a professional preparatory programme like this, we have proper in-person exams. (Teacher, Medical Programme) We are spared when it comes to that [cheating]. It would have been chaotic if we were to continue with the take-home exam […] Then I would be very scared of [what] doctors we would get. […] We would completely lose control […]. They could then have cheated on all major clinical courses. That would be appalling. (Teacher, Medical Programme)
Resistance as a strategy in the field of higher education
Occupying a space in the most dominant region of the field, the Medical Programme had significant resources and was less susceptible to external pressures. This autonomy allowed a level of resistance to societal and political pressures for digitalisation, as well as to pandemic-related restrictions. In addition, the Medical Programme teachers perceived that changes induced by the pandemic restrictions in many programmes, such as take-home examinations and digital classes, lowered the expectations on the medical students’ academic performance and the academic quality of the Medical Programme itself. Therefore, these changes were seen as a threat to the programme's high status and, consequently, to its position in the field of higher education. Rather than stemming from deliberate calculation to preserve the programme's position, the resistance to digital education and defence of on-site training emerged as a natural and necessary response. It functioned as an unconscious strategy, shaped by the staff's deep investment in the logic of the field and the belief in the irreplicable value of embodied medical skills and hands-on medical training. That the Medical Programme's standing within the field of higher education influenced their strategy regarding emergency remote education becomes even more pronounced when contrasted with the Nursing Programme. The Nursing Programme shared many similarities with the Medical Programme; however, the Nursing Programme's less privileged position within the higher education field opened up for a somewhat different strategy.
Momentous changes but willingness to adjust: The nursing programme
Like the Medical Programme, the Nursing Programme incorporated a considerable amount of practical training and patient interaction. Consequently, the pandemic-related restrictions led to significant changes for the programme. In contrast to the Medical Programme, the Nursing Programme faculty appeared more amenable to adapting to the new educational environment. They also expressed openness to retaining some of the digital elements in their post-pandemic curriculum.
Pragmatic adjustment to the new conditions
Students enrolled in the Nursing Programme undergo multiple internship trainings as part of their curriculum. Due to the pandemic, some of these internships had to be cancelled, an action that the faculty viewed as having detrimental consequences for the students’ education. Although the shift to distance learning was viewed as having a negative impact, particularly on internships and hands-on training, faculty also noted that the new conditions fostered creativity in the development of alternative instructional methods. I think there will be some digital elements that will remain, and I think that's good. […] I think we will benefit from being more digital than before. (Teacher, Nursing Programme)
Like teachers for other programmes, the nursing teachers missed meeting students on campus and struggled to maintain the students’ and their own motivation in the digital setting. ‘I missed […] the direct contact with students’, one of the teachers said, and added, ‘the confirmation for me as a teacher, it's almost completely gone on Zoom’. Despite the problems that nursing teachers experienced while distance teaching, the overall impression from the Nursing Programme interviews was that the teachers were comparatively positive towards using digital tools. One of the teachers summarised the programme's rather optimistic view as follows: ‘Converting to purely digital teaching has been exciting but also very exhausting […]. There is a lot that can be done, and I would say that it has worked beyond my expectations’. The Nursing Programme's pragmatic and flexible engagement with the shifting conditions reflects its position in the field of higher education. While faculty were invested in maintaining educational standards, they did not appear to be defending a long-established symbolic order, as was the case in the Medical Programme. Their relative openness suggests a heterodox position in the field, in contrast to the orthodox stance of the Medical Programme. Their willingness to adopt new forms of education, in particular digital education imposed from outside the field and aligned with external logics, seemed to come naturally and can be interpreted as an unconscious strategy for gaining recognition from and enhancing legitimacy with external actors, such as politicians, and the general public.
A flexible relationship to the field's symbolic stakes
During the pandemic, examinations that were typically conducted on-site had to transition to digital formats. Initially, no exemption was requested (Uppsala University, 2020b). Later, the Nursing Programme applied for exemption from examination requirements on-site, but on a significantly smaller proportion of the programme compared to the Medical Programme (Uppsala University, 2021). In addition, the teachers’ attitudes toward digital education differed greatly between the two programmes. Some teachers from the Nursing Programme opted to conduct oral examinations in a digital setting. Their experience of this examination form was positive. They recognised the advantage of students verbalising their knowledge and contended that this format provided an opportunity for both students and teachers to ask clarifying questions. Moreover, a higher number of students passed the examination than usual. One downside was that some students had cheated by using smartphones and course literature during the oral exams. One time, such cheating even led to the entire student group failing the exam, one of the teachers reported.
While the Medical Programme teachers expressed their fear that medical students would cheat – leading them to apply for an exemption from the university's restrictions on in-person exams, allowing them to conduct exams on campus – the perspective within the Nursing Programme was different. These teachers weren’t entirely convinced that it was possible to prevent students from cheating, and they openly acknowledged that students did cheat. In the quote below, one of the teachers explains that they often reported Nursing Programme students for cheating. Reporting was important, even if it negatively impacted the reputation of the programme, a nursing teacher emphasised. He also noted that the number of reported students in a programme didn’t necessarily represent the actual number of students cheating, but rather reflected the teachers’ propensity to report incidents. What is our view of cheating? How do we talk about it? What do we think about reporting? Because sometimes we can almost feel that […] ‘oh no, our education is the one with the most [cheating] reports’ […]. And then it's like a big disgrace and a feeling of shame somehow. And then I just feel ‘yes, maybe, maybe not. Or is it the case that you have actually been good at reporting?’ (Teacher, Nursing Programme)
Adaptability as a strategy in the field of higher education
In summary, the interviews with the Nursing Programme staff highlighted a relatively positive attitude towards the significant changes prompted by the emergency distance education. They also indicated a willingness to adapt the education to new circumstances. Why did the Nursing Programme show a comparatively higher willingness to adjust to the pressures brought about by the COVID-19 restrictions while the Medical Programme resisted changes? The conditions at both programmes were, in many respects, similar. Both were in fact preparing their students for the same sector, both had many practical components, and required preparing students for direct patient contact. However, looking at the distinct positions of the two programmes within the field of higher education provides some insights. For a programme with abundant resources and a dominant position in the field, such as the Medical Programme, there is significantly much at stake. If the status, high social recruitment, and other resources that underpin its position are not safeguarded, the programme risks losing its standing. Without the same volume of symbolic capital to defend, and with fewer means with which to assert autonomy, the Nursing Programme faculty were more disposed to adapt, and to experiment within the constraints imposed by the pandemic. Rather than being the result of rational calculation, the programme's stance was an expression of field-conditioned orientation towards innovation and compliance, a sense of what was and was not at stake for the programme.
Small changes and little resistance: The business programme
While teachers from both the Medical and Nursing Programmes described significant disruptions in their education due to the shift to emergency remote education, teachers from other programmes reported minimal changes during the transition to a digital setting. The Business Programme, for instance, experienced fewer challenges.
Beneficial adaption
Like their counterparts in other programmes, teachers from the Business Programme found the transition from on-site to distance education demanding. They had to familiarise themselves with new digital tools and invest an effort in keeping students motivated and engaged. However, compared to other programmes, the adjustments required for digital teaching in the Business Programme seemed less intensive. One teacher commented, ‘But the job isn’t that big … I do … basically the same things. […]’ While students in the programme expressed missing the social elements of their education, ‘Even though you might acquire the same knowledge, the experience isn’t quite the same’, they acknowledged that the technical aspects of distance education were efficient. One business student noted: ‘All we had to do was download Zoom on our computers. Everything else was already in place. Technically, it's been smooth’. Even the internships that students were expected to complete at companies as part of the programme proved successful. ‘There was a slight decrease in the number of students going on internships compared to the previous year, but I don’t get the impression that the quality has diminished’, said one of the teachers. At the onset of emergency remote education, faculty in the Business Programme conducted live lectures via Zoom. However, they soon realised that recorded lectures could be just as effective. ‘The difference for students was minimal, and recorded lectures proved to be far more cost-efficient. We began recording the lectures early on to make them reusable’, explained one teacher. These recorded lectures proved particularly useful in light of recent budget cuts to the programme. ‘Given the financial constraints, we’ve been able to maintain the standard of teaching by utilising pre-recorded lectures’, the teacher said, and added, ‘I don’t foresee a return to traditional lectures; the recorded ones are serving us well’.
The digital format offered dual benefits: It was not only cost-efficient but also adaptable to student needs and interests, and allowed for greater student attendance. ‘In my course with 60 enrolled students, I can see that 58 have watched the pre-recorded lecture. In contrast, if I hold the lecture in a physical classroom, attendance might dwindle to just 25 students’, one teacher noted. Student attendance at in-person lectures tended to decrease over the course duration. ‘Especially in late October and early November, if it's raining heavily, there's little enthusiasm for attending a 9 a.m. lecture on campus’, the teacher added. Faculty in the Business Programme also identified other advantages associated with the digital format. For instance, it became significantly easier to engage external speakers when they could deliver their lectures via Zoom. This stance reflected a beneficial adaption of digital resources in order to advance educational outcomes. Unlike the Medical Programme which viewed digital tools as a threat to educational quality, the Business Programme faculty perceived them as assets that could improve accessibility and attendance, even beyond the pandemic. The Business Programme illustrates how less symbolically laden programmes could take advantage of the changes brought about by the remote emergency education. As pointed out in the quote below, and similar to the Nursing Programme, Business Programme staff wanted to take advantage of the digital format but were unsure if they would be allowed to do so. Then our vice-chancellor has now […] announced that teaching should return to normal format, as far as possible, now that the infection rates seem to be more under control and so on. I am not entirely sure I would even be allowed to use pre-recorded lectures, even if I wanted to. So, it's a bit unclear. And that's a shame; time was spent on something that actually works quite well, or maybe even pretty good. And now we have to go back and do similar things again in the classroom, which I think is unnecessary. (Teacher, Business Programme)
A heterodox approach to academic integrity
Before the pandemic, the Business Programme employed a mix of on-site and take-home examinations. While take-home exams remained unchanged, on-site examinations required modifications to accommodate at-home testing. This adaptation necessitated additional effort from the teachers, but the transition appeared to be quite smooth. One teacher detailed how on-site exams were converted to take-home formats with essay or multiple-choice questions, stating that, ‘Taking everything into account, it has worked quite well, I would say. We were naturally concerned about cheating and plagiarism. We attempt to monitor that as best we can, but complete control is unfeasible’. While the Business Programme's stance towards student cheating doesn’t necessarily mean that business students cheated more than others, it did seem to influence the teachers’ perceptions of the transition to a digital setting. The risk of students cheating online was not viewed as a significant concern. This attitude starkly contrasts with that of the Medical Programme's faculty, who believed that cheating would be catastrophic, leading to deep apprehensions about distance examinations. The Business Programme's seemingly more relaxed stance on academic integrity suggests a heterodox position in the field, similar to the Nursing Programme, where the symbolic stakes tied to examinations were lower and educational practices more flexible.
Embracing digitalisation as a strategy in the field of higher education
While faculty in the Business Programme acknowledged the advantages of the digital format, they were not unequivocally positive. Echoing the sentiments of teachers in other programmes, they emphasised the importance of on-site student interaction. However, it appeared that the digitalisation prompted by COVID-19 restrictions not only addressed immediate concerns but also offered new strategies for tackling pre-existing challenges within the programme, such as financial constraints and students’ reluctance to attend in-person lectures. The Business Programme's response indicates a field-positioned strategy aligned with its relatively dominated status in the field of higher education. Unlike the Medical Programme, whose symbolic capital was rooted in meritocratic exclusiveness, a prestigious tradition and embodied medical knowledge, the Business Programme valued more instrumental and flexible stances oriented towards efficiency, adaptability, and innovation. Furthermore, their stance reflects a conscious alignment with prevailing institutional pressures, such as strained economy, efficiency demands, and responsiveness to student preferences. All in all, the adaptation of the programme to the new situation was also in line with values of efficiency, organisational change, and innovation cherished in the world of business, for which the programme prepares the students.
Small changes but forceful resistance: The law programme
The teaching for law students at Uppsala University primarily consisted of lectures, seminars, and meetings in smaller groups, so-called base groups. Compared to other programmes, the law students’ schedule had relatively few designated hours per week, leading students to engage in a significant amount of independent study. Examinations were normally conducted on-site and consisted of reflective essay questions rather than factual queries that could easily be looked up online. The programme had few practical components. In these aspects, the Law Programme appeared to be minimally impacted by the shift to emergency remote education. However, both students and, more notably, teachers in the Law Programme exhibited strong resistance to the digital educational format.
On-site seminars and habitus formation
When the government issued the COVID-19 restrictions, the Law Programme teachers transferred their lectures, as well as the student seminars, to Zoom. In some respects, the transition seemed to be comparatively easy. ‘It has continued as usual for us, really’, one of the law students said. Similarly, as in other education programmes, the teachers and students in the Law Programme expressed that digital lectures were less inspiring than lectures on-site. At the same time, digital lectures seemed to fit the Law Programme rather well as the lectures were normally given to many students (250–300 students) and therefore often consisted of one-way communication from teacher to students. Sometimes the interaction could even be enhanced in a digital setting, with the chat function for example. One of the teachers explained that ‘in the chat … questions just pour in. And people ask questions about all sorts of things, things you would never imagine being asked in a lecture hall’.
However, an overarching problem within the Law Programme during the emergency remote education was the seminars. Both teachers and students stated that the seminars had a pivotal function, and that they needed to take place on-site. One of the students explained that ‘the seminars are so important to us. Our entire education, almost, is built on them’, and further stated that digital seminars implied that ‘you actually lose quite a bit’. During the seminars, students were fostered in ‘the juridical argumentation’. It did not seem possible to convey such knowledge, ‘to argue back and forth with someone’, to students in a digital setting. The Law Programme teachers underlined that the quality of the programme in fact was dependent on on-site seminars and on-site discussions in the base groups. The most important thing for the quality […], are the base groups and seminar groups. […] Seminar teaching is extremely important. But also, that we meet physically, that we see each other and include the non-verbal communication … as a factor where you see how people react to what you say, you get instant feedback, so to speak, on your own performance, on your own arguments, and so on. Which is lost in the digital space […] so that's what I think is absolutely most important. And that's why I’m not so fond of the digital seminar room. (Teacher, Law Programme)
A conservative stance
Another reason for the relatively strong resistance to emergency remote education within the Law Programme was their traditional stance towards education in general. The student quoted below described this traditional viewpoint, suggesting that the shift to emergency remote education within the Law Programme was a last resort. The implication was that the programme aimed to revert to its original educational format as soon as possible. At the law faculty, they are […] generally quite conservative […]. They want, to the greatest extent possible, to have everything physical and everything in paper form and have it as we’ve always had it … and it's a bit irritating that there is no kind of effort to modernise things. And it's completely unthinkable for the entire faculty that we should have things digitally for a longer time, really, so they have done this only, only, only, only because they have been really forced to. (Student, Law Programme) Within the Law Programme, we have 30-point exams [accounting for the whole semester]. And that's because we don’t want to measure detailed knowledge, but it's the methods we’re after, the craft. And then we ask questions in such a way that methods and craftsmanship should come to the fore. And, therefore, there was not much difference in how we asked the questions. (Teacher, Law Programme) That is why we have the on-site examinations, there is no exam which is so cost-effective […] and just, and fair […]. It's clear that the possibility of collaboration increases enormously if you sit at home, and you can call each other, and so on. (Teacher, Law Programme)
Resisting small changes as a strategy in the field of higher education
Similarly to the Medical Programme teachers, the Law Programme teachers exhibited strong resistance to emergency remote education. While the Medical Programme's resistance could be partially attributed to its practical components, such factors were less applicable to the Law Programme. Although the Law Programme emphasised juridical argumentation and placed value on on-site seminars, transitioning to a digital format appeared to be relatively straightforward. Therefore, the resistance did not seem to stem from practical constraints but rather from a desire to maintain traditional educational methods, quality, and high demands on the students. Given that the Law Programme was rich of resources and occupied a privileged and dominant position within the field of higher education, this resistance may be interpreted as a more or less conscious strategy to safeguard a high status.
Conclusion: Strategies dependent on position in the field
In this article, we have delved into the adaptation of higher education to emergency remote education during the COVID-19 pandemic in Sweden. Drawing on 82 interviews with students, teachers, and other staff across 10 education programmes in the fields of Natural Sciences, Medicine and Health, Social Sciences, and Humanities at Uppsala University, we employ the Bourdieusian concepts of ‘field’, ‘strategy’, ‘symbolic capital’, ‘doxa’, and ‘habitus’ to dissect diverse perspectives and practices surrounding this emergency shift. Our in-depth analysis uncovers four predominant strategies pertaining to emergency remote education initiated by the pandemic across the education programmes – strategies that should not be understood as purely conscious or rational decisions, but rather as shaped by each programme's resources and position in the field of higher education. The strategies were: 1. While the call for emergency remote education implied major shifts, the education programmes were reluctant to adapt; this was especially evident in the Medical Programme. 2. The push for emergency remote education brought about substantial modifications, and the education programmes adjusted accordingly; the Nursing Programme stands out in this context. 3. While emergency remote education presented minimal challenges, the programmes were keen on broader transformations; the Business Programme exemplifies this approach. 4. Even though emergency remote education called for slight tweaks, the programmes hesitated to embrace them; the Law Programme serves as a notable case of this perspective.
The study contributes to research on emergency remote education in several ways. While previous research compares students and teachers (Amzalag et al., 2021: 243), different types of courses (Iglesias-Pradas et al., 2021: 1), institutions (Lorenza and Carter, 2021: 1), and countries (Lopez et al., 2021: 404), few studies have focused on comparing different education programmes. Our study contributes to filling this gap in the existing literature. Studies that do focus on differences between education programmes indicate two key dimensions: A practical dimension involving varying levels of preparedness and adaptability (Iglesias-Pradas et al., 2021: 9–10), and a normative dimension, pertaining to the willingness or resistance to implement necessary changes (Lopez et al., 2021: 409). Our research aligns with these findings. However, we argue that the strategies of education programmes should also be explained in relation to their positions within the field of higher education, which implies social hierarchies and polarities between the programmes, which, in turn, help to explain such practical adjustments and normative stances. Our categorisation of programme strategies bridges structural positioning and institutional agency. It enables a more nuanced understanding of how and why institutions respond differently to educational disruption, and extends existing models that focus on practical and normative dimensions. Our findings not only illuminate the experiences of various education programmes during the emergency remote education prompted by COVID-19 restrictions, but also shed light on the broader context of societal transformation. Bourdieu's field concept highlights the existence of a certain level of inertia or resistance to change within society.
Our study reveals that the relative resistance is strongest and most pronounced among educational programmes that occupy dominant positions within the field of higher education, such as the Medical and Law Programmes. These programmes valued highly on-site exams, and they persisted in their strategy with on-site examinations when criticised. This resistance can be interpreted as an orthodox strategy to safeguard privileged positions within the field while also contributing to the maintenance of existing hierarchies in education and society at large. Conversely, educational programmes with fewer resources and positioned in dominated parts of the field, such as the Nursing and Business Programmes, are less likely to be able to develop strategies of resistance and are thus more prone to adapt by adopting a heterodox stance built on accepting and/or promoting change. This indicates that, for a programme, the level of autonomy rises with the amount of capital possessed. In parallel, the stakes also increase, as shown by representatives of both the Medical and the Law Programmes in their reasoning about the dangers presented by the emergency remote education with regard to the level of trust that are put in these programmes. In this respect, the pandemic also served as an occasion to imprint the high social value of the dominating educational programmes – a value to be safeguarded at any cost.
Footnotes
Funding
The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by Uppsala University.
Data availability statement
The data supporting the findings are stored at Uppsala University. The data are not publicly available, since they contain information that could compromise the privacy of research participants.