Abstract
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic had severely disrupted the education system in a variety of settings, particularly medical and dental teaching institutes. Restricting the teaching system to virtual mode and the treatment aspect to emergency-only care was of great challenge, in order to prevent the spread of COVID-19. During the pandemic, distance learning had become necessary to ensure that education continues. OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to analyse dental students' perceptions of the transition of education from traditional to distance learning. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study consisting of a 25-statement online questionnaire, which was validated (Item- Content Validity Index (I-CVI: 0.87-0.89), reliability confirmed (Cronbach's alpha = 0.82). The questionnaire was anonymously administered to students studying dentistry at the Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India. The data collected were analysed statistically. RESULTS: A total of 713 out of 800 undergraduate dental students participated in the survey, resulting in an 89.12% response rate. Approximately 74% students did not feel that it was easier to concentrate in online classes than in offline lectures, and 60.9% of the students felt that they could not learn the theoretical aspects adequately. Almost three-fourths of the students (73.9%) felt that lockdowns and distance education severely affected the quality of their dental education. Most of the students (86.4%) felt that a lack of patient exposure would affect their future dental practice. With respect to learning preferences, the majority of the students preferred a combination of traditional methods and online learning. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic taught not only the use of technology in education but also future learning strategies. In today's technologically adept world, e-learning is a convenient and effective method for teaching undergraduate dental students. Dental education is evolving consistently to accommodate rapid changes in the education system. However, it should be used as an auxiliary approach in the clinical setting since it cannot replace the conventional face-to-face approach.