• Mary Gobbi University of Southampton, UK
Keywords: COVID-19, teacher education, evaluation metrics, student perceptions, mixed methods


The papers in this Edition of the Journal comprise nine papers, of which three are related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Together, the papers address the perceptions and experiences of students and their teachers, demonstrating where the views/conceptual understandings of students and their teachers align, where they do not and where stress factors have had an impact. The papers reflect a varied range of participant countries both in terms of the authors, but perhaps more importantly the study sites (Cuba, The Czech Republic, Germany, India, Mexico, Philippines, Slovakia, Spain, and Turkey). Similarly, the programmes of study included Engineering, Mathematics, Tourism, foreign languages, social sciences, and education.
     Consequently, the methodologies and methods are appropriately diverse, ranging from social network theory, mixed methods, qualitative research complex statistical analyses, evaluation scales like COPE, Hedperf, student evaluations of teaching, student engagement, and Sojkin’s instrument to evaluate the influences upon first- and second-generation university students. The authors have also generated some very informative literature reviews outlining the evidence base and the related conceptual and theoretical issues in their respective fields. While some studies had small samples, their findings may have important feedback for local educational service improvement, even if generalizability could not be claimed, readers may find utility in face validity. The papers also remind us that educational research is challenging, whether in the handling of small cohorts, the complexity of the issues under study or the application of sophisticated measuring tools. None the less, evaluation, audit, practitioner research or large scale studies are all necessary activities if we are to improve our understandings of (1) ourselves as educators/researchers; (2) our students with their motivations, interests and capabilities; (3) the system infrastructures that hinder or support the educational endeavours; and of course, (4) the efficacy of the pedagogies for a given cohort, in a specific programme in a cultural context.


Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Mary Gobbi, University of Southampton, UK

Emeritus Professor (University of Southampton, UK) and Editor of Tuning Journal for Higher Education since 2019. Professor Gobbi (PhD, MA Ed, Dip N ,Dip Ned, RN) has been Tuning Nursing co-ordinator since 2003 and is an expert educational developer and evaluator, with extensive national and international experience. These include projects within the European Union (e.g. technologies in healthcare training, on Sectoral Skills Councils for Nursing’; role and training of health care assistants; developing a European MSc in Advanced Rehabilitation Technologies,); South Sudan (developing standardized in service midwifery training)’; Germany and US (Leadership Competences for executive nurse leaders); Republic of Georgia (developing bachelors nurse education); and Canada (comparing EU and Canadian nurse education and advising on masters level standards). Mary has experience with different levels of education for nurses and other health care professionals (from care assistant to post doctoral level); and with different educational strategies and technologies (from the use of grading in practice, simulation and use of mobile technologies to improve critical care education and resuscitation performance using ‘smart technologies’). She has supervised 10 doctoral students to successful completion.

How to Cite
Gobbi, Mary. 2023. “Introduction”. Tuning Journal for Higher Education 10 (2), 19-27.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 3 > >>