www.ijcrsee.com
667
Miletić, D., Maksimović, J., & Trifunović, N. (2025). Online vs. Face-to-Face Teaching: Advantages and Challenges from Students’
Perspective, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 13(3), 667-679.
Original scientific paper
Received: October 08, 2025.
Revised: November 30, 2025.
Accepted: December 07, 2025.
UDC:
37.018.43:004.738.5
10.23947/2334-8496-2025-13-3-667-679
© 2025 by the authors. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the
Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
*
Corresponding author: danijela.milosevic@filfak.ni.ac.rs
Abstract: The aim of this research was to examine students’ perceptions of online and face-to-face teaching by
combining quantitative and qualitative research approaches. The research was conducted on a sample of 524 students, and
the general results confirm that students are more oriented towards face-to-face rather than online classes. Online teaching
is recognized as a more flexible form of learning that enables better organization of time, spatial independence, economy
and greater availability of teaching content. This form of learning is often accompanied by a lack of motivation, limited
social interaction with professors and colleagues, as well as technical and other difficulties that affect the quality of acquired
knowledge. On the contrary, face-to-face teaching is perceived as more stimulating for learning, as it provides direct contact,
better exchange of information and a higher level of engagement and motivation, although it is less economical and requires
more time resources. The obtained results indicate the need to combine the best aspects of both forms of teaching, which
include flexibility and digital possibilities of online learning with direct contact and motivational effects of traditional teaching.
Keywords: online teaching, face-to-face teaching, students, quality of learning, higher education.
Danijela Miletić
1*
, Jelena Maksimović
1
, Nevena Trifunović
2
1
University of Niš, Faculty of Philosophy, Department of pedagogy, Serbia,
e-mail: danijela.milosevic@filfak.ni.ac.rs, jelena.maksimovic@filfak.ni.ac.rs
2
Academy of Educational Medical Vocational Studies in Kruševac, Serbia, e-mail: stanisavljevicnevena@gmail.com
Online vs. Face-to-Face Teaching: Advantages and Challenges from
Students’ Perspective
Introduction
Today, direct instruction is based on modern pedagogical concepts that aspire to a school culture
dominated by learning strategies in which students are significantly more involved and activated in the
teaching process. However, we often witness that, despite modern learning strategies and dedicated work
of teachers, part of the students prefers to master the teaching material through online teaching, which
marked the era of digitization. On the other hand, when a student from the school bench, who has un-
derstood and adopted the material, “explains” it to another student in “their” way, it becomes much easier
and more comprehensible. The question arises, how is it possible that, despite the teacher’s expertise
and competence, the implemented material represents an obstacle for the student, while with the tools
provided for online teaching, it becomes much easier? Such examples are common in our educational
practice. They indicate face-to-face learning or online learning. Such learning is seen as a form of learn-
ing, where mutual differences in students’ perceptions are used as learning potential. And therefore, face-
to-face teaching or online teaching - an epoch-making dilemma?
Pronounced changes in society occur under the auspices of modern trends in which information
spreads at high speed and becomes more and more complex. Mastering basic knowledge in such an en-
vironment is as important as ever, but it is no longer enough. Today’s students need to learn much more
than previous generations (Boud, 2001). They need to know how to find and use new information, how to
make important decisions about complex issues, and how to cooperate with others. There is no doubt that
different learning models change the approach to the nature of learning (Gal and Fallik, 2021), because it
becomes enjoyable and useful, and its participants become more deeply involved (Gamal, 2017). There-
fore, it is necessary to provide the possibility to direct the potential of direct or online learning towards the
www.ijcrsee.com
668
Miletić, D., Maksimović, J., & Trifunović, N. (2025). Online vs. Face-to-Face Teaching: Advantages and Challenges from Students’
Perspective, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 13(3), 667-679.
function of encouraging the holistic competence of students, that is, that students not only mutually build
and develop holistic support by learning from each other, but also by learning from each other.
Learning is an active and dynamic process in which students learn through work and practical experi-
ences. Establishing a dynamic learning environment requires student-centered teaching, which consists of
interactive situations and encourages students to participate more during class. This approach to the educa-
tional process is recognized in pedagogical literature as interactive pedagogy (Knežević-Florić, 2006). With
an interactive approach, the teacher encourages students to exchange certain knowledge and experiences
with each other in order to let them know that interactive relationships are valued in teaching. In practice, it
has been observed that some students learn the material most easily while listening to the teacher teach a
certain lesson, others by reading contents from textbooks and recommended sources, some while transcrib-
ing lessons and making summaries, retelling the lesson, underlining certain teaching contents, extracting
key words or theses, drawing mind maps, tables, graphs, etc. In accordance with different learning styles,
teachers should carefully select different educational tools for learning (Kovačević, 2021).
Is interaction in the school environment a starter of both face-to-face and online learning? The na-
ture and quality of interactions and relationships are partly determined by the acquired skills and motivation
that individual students bring to their experiences. This includes the student’s social skills. Some of those
skills are emotion recognition and expression, decision-making and problem-solving, perspective-taking,
empathy, and communication (Woods and Hanish, 2021). Each of these skills is important for interaction
and relationships because it allows individuals to understand their own needs, goals, and desires, but
also to understand the needs, goals, and desires of other students. It is considered that student-teacher
interaction is one of the key factors in increasing student satisfaction with online teaching (Sher, 2009).
Interaction with other students, as well as strong interpersonal relationships, increase students’ sense of
belonging to a group and are also associated with persistence in studies (Rivera Munoz et al., 2020) and
achievements in the learning process (Cardoso et al., 2011).
The fact is that a large part of online learning takes place informally without the teacher’s involve-
ment in the process itself, which is characteristic of students’ activities in their free time. But formal online
learning that takes place in the school environment can contribute more to more effective learning among
students than traditional methods of learning and teaching (Baltzersen, 2024; Ilić, 2013: 182). It should
not be seen as a substitute for teaching and activities carried out by teachers, because online learning is
an important supplement to teaching and learning itself that improves the quality of education and educa-
tion of students. It can be organized depending on the nature and character of the teaching content, the
goal of the lesson, and the needs and abilities of the students. Online teaching directs students towards
this global field and provides them with the opportunity to enter the digital work market more prepared and
aware. A proactive approach to this form of teaching implies not only the use of existing knowledge, but
also turning to predictive research within the framework of creative thinking studies.
Unlike online teaching, classroom teaching is closer to reality, it gives students the opportunity
to reflect, discuss, and debate with their colleagues and teachers. With effective teaching, the teacher
encourages self-directed learning if: 1) he identifies indicators of the level and structure of knowledge,
interests and needs for learning, for gaining experiences, abilities and skills, and establishes how to help
the student engage those potentials in solving learning tasks in the zone of the student’s immediate further
development; 2) get to know the individual learning style and its limiting and encouraging characteristics; 3)
determine the learning goals, identify the desired outcomes and acceptable evidence that they have been
achieved and 4) together with the student, prepare, implement and evaluate two or three learning plans,
getting the student used to often asking himself what he has learned (Ilić, 2013: 182). Effective teaching is
a unique process of complementary educational activities of teachers (leading teaching) and cognitive-cre-
ative activities of students (learning) with the aim of acquiring knowledge, improving skills, forming positive
habits, developing abilities, nurturing moral qualities and other potentials of the emancipated personality of
each student to their personal maximum. The level of effectiveness of teaching is determined according to
the essential features of its courses and the quality of educational outcomes or results (Ilić, 2015).
The simplest principle that underlies all the syntheses discussed above is “safe learning and teach-
ing”. It is achieved when it has an explicit and transparent purpose, when it is challenging, and when both
teachers and students strive to achieve the set goal. Safe learning and teaching are achieved when there
are exercises whose purpose is actually to achieve the goal, when feedback is established, when teach-
ers and students actively and passionately participate in the process. (Andevski, 2015: 43).
www.ijcrsee.com
669
Miletić, D., Maksimović, J., & Trifunović, N. (2025). Online vs. Face-to-Face Teaching: Advantages and Challenges from Students’
Perspective, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 13(3), 667-679.
Both face-to-face and online classes can be organized in different ways. Visible structures are less
important if they are applied more often. A key condition is the teacher’s view of his own role in the learning
and teaching process, what is his influence on the student’s learning. In this sense, it is necessary for teach-
ers to apply the evaluation of their actions through the information they receive from students, which can be
checked, changed, and maintained. This refers to the following aspects: What is each student, following the
actions of the teacher, obliged to do? How can available resources be used to move students to the place
where, according to the teacher, they should be - and in the most effective way? It is very important what
the teacher does, but the most important thing is that - by what he does - he affects the students in the right
way. With the appropriate spirit and appropriate actions, a positive learning effect will be achieved.
Bearing in mind that the pace of social changes shows no signs of slowing down in the future, and
that it is necessary to monitor and adequately respond to changes in higher education, the goal of this
research was to examine the perception of students about online and face-to-face teaching, as active
users of these forms of teaching, but also key subjects who can contribute to the identification and imple-
mentation of positive changes.
Materials and Methods
Research Aim and Research Tasks
The aim of this research was to examine students’ perceptions of online and face-to-face teaching
by combining quantitative and qualitative research approaches. The importance of this topic stems from
the fact that online teaching is increasingly present in education, especially in higher education institu-
tions. Accordingly, it seeks to determine the current state of practice and the possibilities for its improve-
ment. In accordance with the research objective, the following tasks have been defined:
1. Determine the orientation of students towards online or face-to-face teaching.
2. Examining students’ perceptions of online and face-to-face teaching with regard to independent vari-
ables (study program and average grade during studies).
3. Examine students’ opinions on the advantages and disadvantages of online teaching.
4. Explore the advantages and disadvantages of face-to-face teaching from students’ perspective.
The research was based on the assumption that students would show a stronger preference for
face-to-face learning compared to online learning, with differences expected in relation to the independent
variables (study program and average grade during studies). It was further assumed that students would
perceive more advantages than disadvantages of face-to-face teaching, while attributing more disadvan-
tages to online teaching.
Sample
The total sample of the research includes 524 students’ Faculty of Philosophy in Niš on the territory
of the Republic of Serbia. The sample structure in relation to the observed variables included male (20.6%)
and female (79.4%) students. Of the total number of participants, 54.2% studied in non-philological majors,
and 45.8% in philological majors. When it comes to the average grade, 21.2% of students had an average
between 6 and 7, 30.0% between 7 and 8, 28.1% between 8 and 9, while 20.8% of students had the high-
est average (between 9 and 10).Taking into account the data on the total number of students enrolled this
year and the total sample of this research, the sample size fully meets the 95% confidence interval.
Research Instruments and Procedures
For the purposes of the research, an instrument was constructed that contains 15 statements and
examines the preferences of online versus face-to-face teaching in terms of different segments of teach-
ing implementation (I am more satisfied with online teaching than face-to-face teaching; Online teaching
made it easier for me to master the teaching content more than face-to-face teaching; Online teaching
contributed to greater social interaction with teachers and colleagues than face-to-face teaching. My
learning progress improved more during online than face-to-face teaching classes; I am more motivated
www.ijcrsee.com
670
Miletić, D., Maksimović, J., & Trifunović, N. (2025). Online vs. Face-to-Face Teaching: Advantages and Challenges from Students’
Perspective, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 13(3), 667-679.
to work in online classes than in non-direct classes, etc.). The students responded to the items on the
scale from 1 (not at all true) to 5 (very true). The validity of the scales is .95, which is confirmed by the
Cronbach α value of internal consistency.
The research also included three open-ended questions, which were asked in order to determine
the orientation of students towards a certain type of teaching and their perception of the advantages and
disadvantages of online and face-to-face teaching.
Students were first introduced to the purpose and tasks of the research. Considering that it is about
students who are 18 years old and older, they confirmed their consent to participate in the research.
Only after obtaining their consent did the students complete instrument, with the option to withdraw from
participation at any time. Completing the instrument took approximately 15 minutes. Full anonymity and
confidentiality of participants were ensured throughout the research process.
Data Analysis
For the purposes of this research, the arithmetic mean (M) was employed as a measure of central
tendency, while the standard deviation (SD) served as an indicator of variability, showing the degree of de-
viation from the mean value. To identify differences between variables, an analysis of variance (ANOVA)
was conducted and a t-test to examine differences between independent samples. All statistical analyses
were carried out using the SPSS 25 software package.
The qualitative analysis was conducted by grouping students’ responses into categories based on
their similarity, followed by identifying and presenting the most representative responses in their entirety.
Results
In order to determine students’ perception of online and face-to-face teaching in relation to the
independent variables, t-test and the analysis of variance (ANOVA) were applied. Table 1 shows that sta-
tistically significant differences (p<.05) were found in students’ responses in relation to the study program
they attended.
Table 1. t-test results for the difference between the students’ perceptions about the online and face-to face
teaching
Study programs M SD t df p
Online teaching made it easier for me to master
the teaching content more than face-to-face
teaching
Non-philological 2.41 .99
-2.181 522 .030
Philological 2.68 1.05
*The mean difference is significant at the .05 level
On average, philology students (M=2.68) agree more strogly with the statement that online teach-
ing made it easier for them to master the material compared to face-to-face teaching, than non-philology
students (M=2.41). Therefore, the determined statistically significant difference (t=-2.18, p=.030) in rela-
tion to the stated statement indicates that students of philology majors perceive online as opposed to
face-to-face teaching as more useful for mastering the content, than students of other majors. There
are no significant differences in other statements, which shows that students of all majors have similar
attitudes. Table 2 shows the differences in the students’ perceptions of the perception of online and face-
to-face teaching relative to the average grade during studies. The results of the t-test in Table 2.
Table 2. Students‘ percepcions about the online and face-to face teaching in relation to average grade during studies
Average grade during studies N M SD F df p
I am more satisfied
online than face-to-face
from 6 to 7 111 2.64 1.46
2.867 3 .036
from 7 to 8 157 2.75 1.52
from 8 to 9 147 2.50 1.47
from 9 to 10 109 2.23 1.33
*The mean difference is significant at the .05 level
www.ijcrsee.com
671
Miletić, D., Maksimović, J., & Trifunović, N. (2025). Online vs. Face-to-Face Teaching: Advantages and Challenges from Students’
Perspective, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 13(3), 667-679.
The results in the presented table indicate the existence of a statistically significant difference be-
tween students of different success, but within only one statement “I am more satisfied with online teach-
ing than face-to-face teaching” (F=2.867; p=.036). A post hoc test showed that there were differences
between students with an average of 7-8 and 9-10, whereby students with a lower average were more
satisfied with online teaching compared to students with a higher average. For the other statements, the
differences were not statistically significant (p > .05), which indicates that the success of students does
not significantly affect their perception of satisfaction with online compared to face-to-face teaching.
Table 3. Student orientation towards the type of teaching
Type of
teaching
Student responses
Online teaching
(25%)
- ,, I would opt for online, because we can follow it at any time and from any place. And the most important
thing is that I have more time for studying and other obligations”.
- “Due to practicality - I don’t waste time traveling to the university and back, I can sleep a little longer in
case I have a morning class, I can drink coffee while listening to a lecture, I can even be in bed and listen
to the lecture, and that makes me feel more relaxed.”
- “I save money with pdf files because I don’t have to buy books”.
- “Because it gives me more time for pre-exam duties than direct classes, it is always available and less
stressful.”
- ,,.I feel more relaxed during online classes, I organize my time and learning pace as suits me. For me
personally, the motivation is greater during online classes.”
- “A more flexible schedule of classes, and the costs of studying are reduced and we have a comfortable
time to work in addition to studying.”
- “Because lectures are not mandatory, so there is less pressure, and because of much more free time.”
Direct teaching
(70%)
- “Immediate, because it is more pleasant, holds attention longer and is more effective”.
- “Because of greater motivation, physical activity (the way to college and back), better socialization with
colleagues and professors”.
- “Because it is more effective in terms of student activity and attention in class”.
- “Direct teaching because there is more interaction and my concentration is better.” Mentally, I feel better
when I know that I have an obligation to go somewhere during the day and not to spend the whole day in
my room. I follow and learn easily and have a greater sense of responsibility”
- “It’s easier to follow the content, and live teaching is of better quality for knowledge acquisition and
interaction”.
- “I will take into account that at our faculty we deal exclusively with social sciences, it is really absurd to
think that social sciences can be learned online”.
Combined
teaching
(5%)
- ,, I could not choose between these two types of teaching. Maybe some combination could be made and
both methods of work applied”.
- “Both have advantages and disadvantages, so it is best to combine them”.
- ,, Organize some lectures, possibly exercises, live, and some theoretical ones online. So, combined”.
In the presented table, the data show that the majority of students (as much as 70%) prefer face-
to-face teaching, while fewer (25%) opt for online teaching. A very small percentage (5%) emphasizes the
combined model, based on the fact that both types of teaching have their advantages and disadvantages,
and that the benefits of both should be used in order to improve educational practice. Reasons in favor of
the majority of students’ orientation towards face-to-face teaching indicate greater student motivation for
learning and work, achieving better social interaction and higher quality teaching. We should not ignore
the answers that confirm the importance of online teaching, especially its flexibility in terms of organiza-
tion, available time, and comfort while attending classes.
www.ijcrsee.com
672
Miletić, D., Maksimović, J., & Trifunović, N. (2025). Online vs. Face-to-Face Teaching: Advantages and Challenges from Students’
Perspective, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 13(3), 667-679.
Table 4. Advantages of online classes from the students’ point of view
Categories Student responses
Spatial flex-
ibility
- “I don’t have to get up early and go to class, I follow it from home.”
- “The big advantage of online classes is that you don’t have to put in physical effort to attend classes and
it’s more relaxed in general because we’re in a space that suits us.”
- “Online teaching is easier for students who do not live in Nis, the classroom is our room, so the comfort is
greater.
Better time
manage-
ment
- ,,I can organize my own time, which refers to how much I will devote to each subject per day. It saves
time and money.”
.- “Easy distribution of time and organization of all the obligations we have during studies.”
- “Easier organization of time if we have private obligations.”
Psychologi-
cal benefits
- “We can follow the lectures in a relaxed way, without any stress.”
- “Less nervousness and tension.”
- “Less anxiety due to the absence of a large number of people in one room.”
- “Personally, I have less nervousness”.
Organization
and quality of
the teaching
process
- “We have more time to study and prepare pre-exam assignments.”
- “Greater availability of learning materials and the possibility of completing several academic duties at the
same time.”
- ,, Existence of diverse and effective methods for processing and adopting materials. And the good thing is
that lectures and exercises can be recorded.”
- “Individual work is present. Everyone can work at their own pace and according to their own capabilities.”
Digital
literacy
-,,Online classes helped me develop digital skills.”
-,
,We improved the knowledge needed to follow online classes and learned some programs for presentations.”
-,,I learned to use different programs that mean something to me outside of class as well.”
The responses of students shown in Table 4 indicate that online teaching provides spatial flexibility,
better organization of time, that it has psychological benefits, positive elements that include the organiza-
tion and quality of the teaching process, as well as that it encourages digital literacy. Students stated that
the online format allows them greater freedom to choose the place and time of study, better coordination
of obligations and saving time. It was also pointed out that this way of working reduces stress and anxi-
ety, and creates a more relaxed atmosphere for learning. As additional advantages, students recognized
the availability of teaching materials, greater independence in work and the development of digital skills,
which are also useful outside the academic context. The mentioned advantages confirm that online teach-
ing contributes to greater flexibility and empowering students for modern and self-directed learning.
www.ijcrsee.com
673
Miletić, D., Maksimović, J., & Trifunović, N. (2025). Online vs. Face-to-Face Teaching: Advantages and Challenges from Students’
Perspective, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 13(3), 667-679.
Table 5. Weaknesses of online teaching from the perspective of students
Categories Student responses
Lack of social interaction with
professors and colleagues
- “Insufficiently high degree of possibility of achieving adequate communication with professors and col-
leagues, because it is mostly one-sided.”
- “Given that the cameras are mostly turned off, there is no non-verbal communication.” When someone
says something, he usually doesn’t get any feedback from his colleagues, and sometimes not even from the
professor, so it’s extremely difficult to interact.”
- “The interaction between colleagues and between students and professors is impoverished.” I believe that
virtual communication for educational purposes cannot meet the high level of productivity precisely because
of this, in contrast to live teaching.”
-,,I believe that online teaching largely isolates both students and professors and in some way retards the
skills of communication and connecting with people (and socialization, in addition to acquiring academic
knowledge and skills, is still an integral part of education and life).”
Lack of motivation and
concentration
- “Students lose motivation and become lazy.”
- “Online classes demotivate me.” I notice that others also get lazy because they are “lulled.”
- “We have no concentration, no attention, and no will to sit alone at home and listen to classes.”
- “Online teaching is boring and monotonous and does not in any way contribute to motivation and energy
when it comes to studying.”
- “I think the biggest punishment is to lock young people in a room and give them a computer.” My motiva-
tion is at zero. It’s hard for me to study and finish all my duties because I don’t see the point of this kind of
work.”
Didactic-methodical
weaknesses
- “With online teaching, much less knowledge is gained because the professors are also more lenient, and
this is to the detriment of our knowledge.”
- “The material is more difficult to master because a lot of independent work is required of us.”
- “The courses themselves are not designed for online teaching”
- “Less time for online tests due to professors’ fear of copying”
- “Online colloquiums do not show students’ real knowledge”
- “Professors burden us with pre-exam obligations that are not sufficiently valued”
- “The impossibility of organizing joint work in groups and workshops”
- “Professors do not adequately prepare for teaching”
Organizational
weaknesses
- “It happened that professors don’t know how to organize themselves, so they are late for classes or
change the dates of lectures.”
- “Some professors did not send work materials on time”
- “A large number of students do not listen to lectures because they are not compulsory”
- “There is too little time for tests and assignments in online classes”
Technical prob-
lems
- ,,Poor conditions for following online classes. Some students may not have equipment to listen to online
classes, or share a laptop/computer with another family member. It also happened that some students did
not have access to the Internet or their Internet connection was bad.”
- “Due to numerous technical problems, it may be difficult to follow the lessons, and the few who do not have
the technical conditions cannot keep up with the information regarding teaching and learning.”
One of the key weaknesses of online teaching, according to students, is the lack of adequate
communication and interaction with professors and colleagues. This form of teaching, according to the
respondents, makes it difficult to establish quality relationships and mutual connections between the
participants of the teaching process. Students also pointed out that online teaching does not provide suf-
ficient incentive for learning, which, among other things, can be linked to insufficient motivation, but also
to shortcomings in the organization and technical conditions of its implementation. A significant number of
responses indicate the poor quality of teaching preparation and implementation, which points to the need
for its further improvement.
www.ijcrsee.com
674
Miletić, D., Maksimović, J., & Trifunović, N. (2025). Online vs. Face-to-Face Teaching: Advantages and Challenges from Students’
Perspective, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 13(3), 667-679.
Table 6. Students.s responses on the benefits of face-to-face teaching
Categories Student responses
Pedagogical
communication
- “I will never forget all the lessons I learned from my professors.” I learned from them that the pedagogical
approach and how to communicate with others is very important.”
- “When I talk live with colleagues and professors, I can see their reactions and then I can judge whether I
did well or not, because those non-verbal signs cannot be seen when we have distance learning.
- “Nothing can replace live contact with professors and colleagues.” We can get to know each other better
and build a relationship of trust and respect.”
- “The best cooperation is achieved live, because that’s how we communicate two-way and we respect each
other more and socialize.”
Pedagogical climate
- “The advantage of direct teaching is that I feel beautiful and fulfilled in classes.”
- “At our university, everyone tries to create a nice atmosphere so that the students enjoy and learn.”
- “Live teaching contributed to me socializing more with my colleagues, because the professors put us in
a position where we have to interact with each other.” Then friendships develop and somehow we bond
better.”
- “It means a lot to me that I can have a good relationship with everyone. There are few of us in the course
and it makes it difficult for us to study if we don’t have a good relationship and if we don’t help each other.”
Didactic-methodical aspect of teaching
- “We often work in a group during classes and learn from each other that way.” We are never bored be-
cause the professors apply different work methods.”
- “Colloquiums and exams are much more difficult to take live, but that is actually an advantage of face-to-
face teaching.” Not everyone can pass and professors have higher criteria for passing.”
- “It requires active participation, full attention and concentration.”
- “Learning is much easier because I can ask the professors anything and they immediately explain the
material to me.”
- “Professors design the class in such a way that they put us in a situation where we have to think, connect
and critically analyze what we learn.”
- “Professors can explain the grade to us, monitor our work and give us the opportunity to assess for our-
selves how much we know and how much we don’t.”
- “Direct teaching is of high quality, because it is based on mutual discussion between professors and stu-
dents, and therefore we can open up various questions and dilemmas.” And it’s also much more interesting,
because the way of working is somehow more creative.
Developing social-emotional
competencies
- “Live in some subjects we learn how to express emotions, which is very important for us as individuals and
professionals.”
- “In the classes, we develop empathy and come to a conflict of opinion with each other, this helps us for life
and the profession I have chosen for.” Tomorrow I will have such situations in practice, so it is important that
I have those skills.”
- “Our professors and teaching assistants emphasize that we show tolerance, because we are all different
and come from different families and backgrounds.”
- “Live teaching is good because it gives us the feeling that we are important to others, that I can rely on my
colleague, understand him better and share some problems with him, and he listens to me and helps me
overcome them.”
Given that the research results showed that students prefer face-to-face teaching, the answers
shown in Table 5 confirm a number of significant advantages of this type of work. Among them, the follow-
ing categories stand out: pedagogical communication, pedagogical climate, didactic-methodical aspect of
teaching and development of social-emotional competences. Students especially emphasize the impor-
tance of direct contact with professors and colleagues, and emphasize the importance of an open, quality
and supportive relationship, based on cooperation, mutual respect, trust and a pleasant atmosphere that
encourages learning and work. In addition, the respondents believe that it is extremely important that
teaching be diverse in terms of methods and forms of work, as well as that the teacher provides con-
tinuous support to students in mastering the teaching content, monitoring progress and evaluating their
achievement. Students especially emphasize the importance of developing social-emotional competen-
cies, which they consider important for their future professional roles, which represents another significant
advantage of face-to-face teaching classes.
www.ijcrsee.com
675
Miletić, D., Maksimović, J., & Trifunović, N. (2025). Online vs. Face-to-Face Teaching: Advantages and Challenges from Students’
Perspective, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 13(3), 667-679.
Table 7. Students’ answers about the weaknesses of direct instruction
Categories Student responses
Organizational and
economic weak-
nesses of direct
teaching
- “It bothers me that I have to print books, and now everything is online and I don’t understand what we
would do when the professors can send them to us in pdf format.”
- “Well, the weakness is that I’m from another city and I have to either rent an apartment or travel every
day to the university.”
- ,,.Mostly, we have lectures and exercises every day, sometimes for the whole day. When it’s like that, I
have to buy something to eat, and sometimes I sit down for a drink with my colleagues. I need money for
all that, so maybe that’s a weakness”
Lack of flexibility and
free time
- “It is more difficult for me to organize myself and coordinate all my obligations, because it takes a lot of
time for me to go to college, follow lectures and exercises, and the fact that we have breaks, so I waste
that time, and if I were at home I could use it to finish pre-exams or to study or for private things.”
- “The weakness is that sometimes I come for a consultation, but I can’t find the professor, so I wait for him
and waste my time.”
- “Exams sometimes take a long time and I can’t use that time for anything, I have to wait for them to call
me to answer.”
- “Because I’m often at university, I don’t have much free time for other activities and seeing friends.”
Although students mostly emphasized the advantages of direct teaching, some of them also point-
ed to its disadvantages, which primarily relate to economic unprofitability and limitations in terms of time
and organization of obligations. Namely, the students stated that this type of teaching requires higher
financial allocations, both for printing teaching materials and for the daily expenses of staying at the uni-
versity (food, transportation, accommodation). In addition, the problem of less flexibility in the schedule
of duties was highlighted, given that physical attendance at classes and breaks between classes take a
significant amount of time, which, according to the students, could be used for exam preparation or private
activities. Also, some students mentioned situations in which there is an unplanned loss of time, such as
waiting for consultations or longer exam dates.
Discussions
One of the results of this research confirms statistically significant differences in the perception of
students of philology and non-philology majors. More precisely, it was determined that students of philol-
ogy majors perceive online teaching as more useful for mastering the content than students of other ma-
jors. Similar findings were recorded in other studies (Mohamed et al., 2023; Johnson and Palmer, 2015),
which indicate that this perception of students results from the greater availability of teaching materials
that enable repeated learning, as well as from the fact that this form of teaching is particularly useful in
mastering theoretical content. However, we should not ignore the findings of other research (Siddiqui et
al., 2024; Photopoulos et al., 2022), which indicate that students of philology majors prefer non-direct
teaching to a greater extent because of its practical character, i.e. the possibility of active language prac-
tice and direct interaction with others. Therefore, the nature of the teaching content greatly contributes to
the students’ perception of the usefulness of online teaching. According to the above, it can be concluded
that unlike non-direct teaching, which is irreplaceable in terms of developing communication skills, online
teaching is more suitable for the acquisition of theoretical content and independent learning.
The research also confirmed the assumption about the existence of differences in the perception of
online and face-to-face teaching of students in relation to their academic success. Although the difference
exists only in terms of satisfaction with online teaching, the result is significant because it indicates that
students with a lower average were more satisfied with it compared to students with a higher average.
Mohamed et al. (2023) obtained the same results, which may indicate that academically successful stu-
dents have higher expectations and a more critical attitude towards online classes, while students with a
lower average can be said to take different elements that meet their criteria.
On the other hand, the answers of the students confirm that 70% of them prefer face-to-face teach-
ing, 25% opt for online teaching, and only 5% of students highlight the combined model, which, in their
opinion, would contribute the most to the quality of teaching. Authors Adnan and Anwar (2020) surveyed
students and found out that there is a reservation of students towards online learning. As many as 71.4%
www.ijcrsee.com
676
Miletić, D., Maksimović, J., & Trifunović, N. (2025). Online vs. Face-to-Face Teaching: Advantages and Challenges from Students’
Perspective, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 13(3), 667-679.
of students stated that traditional learning was more effective compared to online learning. One of the
reasons for such results may be that face-to-face teaching enables more active and effective learning
than online teaching.
When it comes to the advantages and disadvantages of online teaching, significant qualitative
results were obtained that confirm the initial assumptions and are in line with the quantitative indicators.
Regarding the advantages of the separate category (spatial flexibility, better organization of time, psycho-
logical benefits, positive elements of organization and quality of the teaching process and encouraging
digital literacy), they point to different, but also interconnected aspects. The perception of the effective-
ness of online teaching depends not only on organizational factors, but also on the psychological adapta-
tion and emotional experience of students in the digital environment. Students recognize the potential of
online teaching, which relates to the improvement of the structure and quality of the educational process,
and emphasize the importance of digital literacy, which is the basis for the application of online teaching
and its further improvement. Another research confirmed that online teaching enables active and flexible
learning and fosters an individual approach. The observed advantages are in accordance with the findings
of this research, and concern flexibility, cost-effectiveness, time efficiency and the possibility of applying
innovative learning methods (Govender and Matlhaba, 2024). As the results of other research confirm that
self-motivation, the ability to understand e-learning, as well as training students for independent work are
very important for online teaching (Jevtić, Milošević and Jevtić-Trifunović, 2022; Bismala and Manurung,
2021), it is evident that many of them are still not prepared for this type of work. Bearing in mind that the
quality of teaching is greatly influenced by the teacher, the need to redefine his role in accordance with
modern needs and conveniences that this model provides is recognized. One of the ways of adequate
preparation for such challenges is to implement programs with future teachers that aim to develop peda-
gogical and professional competencies through structured mentoring, which also contributes to their pro-
fessional performance and the success of students (Yespolova et al., 2025).
The students’ answers about the weaknesses of online teaching are classified within the categories
related to the lack of social interaction, insufficient cognitive and emotional engagement during the learning
process, low level of didactic-methodical preparation and realization of teaching and organizational and
technical difficulties in the implementation of this type of teaching. There is no doubt that students empha-
size the disadvantages of online teaching more than the advantages, which indicates that the online form
of teaching has not yet reached the desired quality in order to support the academic, social, emotional
and other needs of students. The research conducted by Adnan and Anwar (2020) also confirms the weak
reach of the Internet, which made it difficult to conduct online classes, but also the lack of social interaction
with colleagues and the application of interactive methods and forms of learning in a digital environment.
The same results were reached by research conducted in Serbia on a sample of students, which confirmed
the results obtained in this research and which indicated the need for innovation in online teaching, espe-
cially in the segments of presentation of teaching content (Arsenijević et al., 2022). It is equally important
to mention that one of the key disadvantages of online teaching is the impossibility of conducting practical
teaching (Kulal and Nayak, 2020; Nambiar, 2020), which was also confirmed by this research.
Bearing in mind that students emphasized the advantages (pedagogical communication, peda-
gogical climate, didactic-methodical teaching quality and development of social-emotional competences)
much more than the shortcomings of face-to-face teaching (economic unprofitability and limitations in
terms of time and organization of duties), it can be seen that the shortcomings of face-to-face teaching are
actually the advantages that students have stated for online teaching. This result confirms once again that
direct teaching is the best way for students to achieve mutual relations with professors and colleagues, to
acquire adequate theoretical and practical knowledge supported by active ways of working and continu-
ous support of teachers, but also to develop socio-emotional competences, which they consider crucial
for their professional vocation. Recent research confirms the importance of social interaction and cogni-
tive skills. More precisely, from emotional support and interactive relationship with others, motivation for
learning and student achievement increase (Karpovets et al., 2025). Therefore, open communication and
a supportive atmosphere are essential for a quality relationship and the realization of online teaching (Al-
mossa, 2021). From the attached, it can be concluded that in teaching practice, it is extremely important
to combine these two types of teaching, because they mutually contribute to different aspects that affect
the quality of teaching and studying.
Given that a limitation of this study was focusing solely on student perceptions, without including all
www.ijcrsee.com
677
Miletić, D., Maksimović, J., & Trifunović, N. (2025). Online vs. Face-to-Face Teaching: Advantages and Challenges from Students’
Perspective, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 13(3), 667-679.
segments of online and face-to-face instruction, examining teachers’ perceptions and comparing them to
student perceptions could provide significant insights for future research.
Conclusions
The results of this research confirm the differences in students’ perceptions in certain aspects of
online and face-to-face teaching in relation to the study program they attend and the academic success
they achieve within their study programs. The orientation of students towards direct teaching stems from
the advantages they attribute to it, primarily in terms of quality pedagogical approach, stimulating peda-
gogical atmosphere and opportunities for the development of socio-emotional competences.
Although students also recognize certain advantages of online teaching, such as spatial flexibility,
better organization of time, psychological benefits and the development of digital literacy, their opinions
nevertheless point to more pronounced challenges of this type of work, which are reflected in reduced
social interaction, weaker engagement and the present organizational and technical difficulties. Despite
this, the potential of online teaching remains an important resource for improving modern teaching prac-
tice and adapting it to the needs of students in the digital age.
Taking into account that both types of teaching have their advantages and disadvantages and that,
according to the students’ perception, it is first of all necessary to raise the quality of online teaching, the
need for complementary consideration and application of both models in higher education practice is rec-
ognized. In order for online teaching to take root in higher education institutions, it is necessary to provide
not only technical conditions for its implementation, but also other segments related to the teaching pro-
cess and cooperation with students. It is especially important to cultivate a positive attitude towards this
form of teaching, to develop and continuously improve the competences of teachers and students, as well
as to devise ways to satisfy the emotional and social needs of students. In addition, it is particularly impor-
tant to ensure the pedagogical conditions necessary for quality online teaching, which include thoughtful
planning of teaching activities, application of methods and strategies that actively involve students, adap-
tation of content to different learning styles, as well as continuous training of teachers for the application
of innovative tools in online teaching. A high-quality pedagogical approach allows the teaching to be not
only informative, but also motivating, interactive and directed towards the development of students’ intel-
lectual, emotional and social competences. Such an approach not only ensures the quality of education,
but also enables the holistic development of students as future bearers of social progress.
Acknowledgements
This study was supported by the Ministry of Science, Technological Development and Innovations
of the Republic of Serbia (Contract No. 451-03-137/2025-03/ 200165). The authors would like to thank the
students who participated in the research.
Funding
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial,
or not-for-profit sectors.
Conflict of interests
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Data availability statement
The data collected and analyzed during the research are fully included in the published article.
Necessary details, clarifications, or data supporting the findings of this study are available from the cor-
responding author upon request. For further information on data availability and journal policies, please
refer to the official IJCRSEE guidelines.
Institutional Review Board Statement
The study did not involve procedures requiring formal approval from an institutional review board
www.ijcrsee.com
678
Miletić, D., Maksimović, J., & Trifunović, N. (2025). Online vs. Face-to-Face Teaching: Advantages and Challenges from Students’
Perspective, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 13(3), 667-679.
(IRB) or ethics committee, as it relied solely on voluntary, anonymous participation in full compliance with
ethical standards. Prior to participation, informed consent was obtained from all participants. Participants
were informed of the study’s objectives, procedures, potential risks, and benefits, as well as their right
to withdraw at any stage without any negative consequences. All ethical considerations were observed,
including the confidentiality of personal information, voluntary participation, and data protection in accord-
ance with applicable legal and institutional guidelines.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, D.M.; data curation, D.M. and N.T.; methodology, D.M. and J.M.; resources,
D.M. and J.M.; formal analysis, D.M., J.M.; validation, D.M., J.M. and N.T.; writing—original draft prepara-
tion, D.M., J.M. and N.T.; writing—review and editing, D.M., and J.M. All authors have read and agreed
to the published version of the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of
the manuscript.
References
Adnan, M., & Anwar, K. (2020). Online Learning amid the COVID-19 Pandemic: students’ perspectives. Online Submission,
2(1), 45-51. http://www.doi.org/10.33902/JPSP.2020261309
Almossa, S. Y. (2021). University students’ perspectives toward learning and assessment during COVID-19. Education and
Information Technologies, 26(6), 7163-7181. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10554-8
Andevski, M. (2015). Uspešno učenje i poučavanje: Šta zaista deluje? [Successful learning and teaching: What really works?]
Učenje i nastava, 1, 31-46.
Arsenijević, J., Belousova, A., Tushnova , Y., Grosseck, G., & Mesaroš Živkov, A. (2022). The Quality of Online Higher Educa-
tion Teaching During the Covid-19 Pandemic. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and
Education (IJCRSEE), 10(1), 47–55. https://doi.org/10.23947/2334-8496-2022-10-1-47-55
Baltzersen, R. K. (2024). Effective use of collective peer teaching in teacher education. Routledge.
Bismala, L., & Manurung, Y. H. (2021). Student satisfaction in e-learning along the COVID-19 pandemic with importance
performance analysis. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 10(3), 753-759. https://doi.
org/10.11591/ijere.v10i3.21467
Boud, D. (2001). Making the move to peer learning. In Boud, D., Cohen, R. Sampson, J. (eds.), Peer learning in higher educa-
tion: learning from and with each other, 1–20. Kogan Page (now Routledge).
Cardoso, A. P., Ferreira, M., Abrantes, J. L., Seabra, C., & Costa, C. (2011). Personal and pedagogical interaction factors
as determinants of academic achievement. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 29, 1596-1605. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.402
Gal, A., Fallik, O. (2021). Learn from each other: a peer-teaching model. Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science
Education, 17(3), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.21601/ijese/10896
Gamal, M. (2017). Learning with each other: peer learning as an academic culture among graduate students in education.
American Journal of Educational Research, 5(9), 944-951. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331502124_
Learning_with_Each_Other_Peer_Learning_as_an_Academic_Culture_among_Graduate_Students_in_Education
Govender, S., & Matlhaba, K. L. (2024). Nurse educators’ perceptions regarding online education: a qualitative study. Journal
of Educators Online, 21(3), n3. https://doi.org/10.9743/jeo.2024.21.3.6
Ilić, M. (2013). Vaspitanje u nastavi tradicionalne i savremene škole. Vaspitni rad škole i nastavnika u savremenim društvenim
uslovima. [Education in traditional and modern schools. Educational work of schools and teachers in modern social
conditions.] Srpska akademija obrazovanja.
Ilić, M. (2015). Didaktika i sloboda učesnika nastavnog procesa. [Didactics and freedom of participants in the teaching process]
In V. Vujević (ed.), Zbornik radova Nauka i sloboda (pp. 645–667). Filozofski fakultet Pale.
Jevtić, B., Milošević, D., & Jevtić-Trifunović, N. (2022). Online nastava tijekom pandemije bolesti Covid-19 – između učinkovitosti
i preferencija. [Online teaching during the Covid-19 pandemic - between efciency and preferences] In M. Drvodelić
(ed.), Prema postpandemijskom obrazovanju: kako osnažiti sustav odgoja i obrazovanja? (pp. 311–336). Sveučilište
u Rijeci, Filozofski fakultet.
Johnson, G., & Palmer, C. (2015). Comparing student assessments and perceptions of online and face-to-face versions of an
introductory linguistics course. Online Learning Journal, 19(2), 48–59. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v19i2.449
Karpovets, M., Borysenko, V., Pasichnyk, I., & Nedzvedovska, O. (2025). The impact of performance on students’ reective
and coping strategies in higher education. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and
Education (IJCRSEE), 13(2), 491–503. https://doi.org/10.23947/2334-8496-2025-13-2-491-503
www.ijcrsee.com
679
Miletić, D., Maksimović, J., & Trifunović, N. (2025). Online vs. Face-to-Face Teaching: Advantages and Challenges from Students’
Perspective, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 13(3), 667-679.
Knežević-Florić, O. (2006). Interaktivna pedagogija – izbor tekstova i završna studija. [Interactive pedagogy - selection of texts
and nal study] Savez pedagoških društava Vojvodine.
Kovačević, I. (2021). Pripremanje svih učenika za polaganje završnog ispita iz srpskog jezika i književnosti u digitalnom
okruženju. [Preparing all students for the nal exam in Serbian language and literature in a digital environment.]
Književnost i jezik, 68(2). Društvo za srpski jezik i književnost Srbije.
Kulal, A., & Nayak, A. (2020). A study on perception of teachers and students toward online classes in Dakshina Kannada
and Udupi District. Asian Association of Open Universities Journal, 15(3), 285–296. https://doi.org/10.1108/
AAOUJ-07-2020-0047
Mohamed, A. M., Nasim, S., Aljanada, R., & Alfaisal, A. (2023). Lived Experience: Students’ Perceptions of English
Language Online Learning Post COVID-19. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 20(7). https://doi.
org/10.53761/1.20.7.12
Nambiar, D. (2020). The impact of online learning during COVID-19: Students’ and teachers’ perspective. The International
Journal of Indian Psychology, 8(2), 783–793. https://ijip.in/articles/the-impact-of-online-learning-during-covid-19-
students-and-teachers-perspective/
Photopoulos, P., Tsonos, C., Stavrakas, I., & Triantis, D. (2022). Remote and in-person learning: Utility versus social experience.
SN Computer Science, 4, 116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42979-022-01539-6
Rivera Munoz, C. A., Baik, C., & Lodge, J. M. (2020). Teacher and student interactions in the rst year of university. Journal of
Further and Higher Education, 44(8), 1130-1142. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2019.1664731
Sher, A. (2009). Assessing the relationship of student-instructor and student-student interaction to student learning and
satisfaction in Web-based Online Learning Environment. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 8(2), 102-120. https://
www.ncolr.org/jiol/issues/pdf/8.2.1.pdf
Siddiqui, A. A., Ul Abideen, M. Z., Fatima, S., Khan, M. T., Gillani, S. W., Alrefai, Z. A., Hussain, M. W., & Rathore, H. A. (2024).
Students’ perception of online versus face-to-face learning: What do the healthcare teachers have to know? Cureus,
16(2), e54217. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.54217
Teppo, M., Soobard, R., & Rannikmäe, M. (2021). Grade 6 & 9 student and teacher perceptions of teaching and learning
approaches in relation to student perceived interest/enjoyment towards science learning. Journal of Baltic Science
Education, 20(1), 119-133. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/21.20.119
Topping, K. (2005). Trends in peer learning. Educational Psychology, 25(6), 631-645. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410500345172
Woods, K. B., Hanish, L. D. (2021). Peer relationships in childhood. In Shackelford, T. K., Weekes-Shackelford, V. A. (eds.), En-
cyclopedia of evolutionary psychological science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19650-3_2395
Yespolova, G., Uzunboylu, H., Nikolaevna, R. N., Gennadievna, S. S., & Aleksandrovna, Z. N. (2025). Young teachers’
perceptions of professional self-efcacy and the implementation of the pedagogical referendum program. Interna-
tional Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 13(2), 427–438. https://doi.
org/10.23947/2334-8496-2025-13-2-427-438