# data[].attributes.body
Blended learning is an approach to learning that combines face-to-face and online learning experiences. Ideally, each online and off will complement the other by using its particular strengths.

# data[].attributes.body
Blended learning combines some form of online learning with some type of offline learning.

# data[].attributes.body
Blended learning involves the presence of an instructor to assist students with their needs. A teacher will be present in the classroom for students attending online classes in a school setting. Students who take online classes from home can communicate with their instructors via message boards and emails. Every day, teachers read their emails and respond to students multiple times.

# data[].attributes.body
Blended learning programs allow students to learn on their own and to use the materials and resources presented to them in ways that work best for them.

# data[].attributes.body
Some parents are concerned that students in blended learning programmes will not spend as much time with their classmates as students in regular classrooms. These programmes are known for their peer interaction. Those in traditional classes will have their peers seated next to them, allowing them to collaborate on homework.

# data[].attributes.headline
12 Of The Most Common Types Of Blended Learning

# data[].attributes.subject
12 Of The Most Common Types Of Blended Learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
by TeachThought Staff

Blended Learning is not so much an innovation as it is a natural by-product of the digital domain creeping into physical spaces.

Broadly speaking, blended learning just means a mix of learning online and face-to-face, which means it's likely your students are already doing some form of blended learning and have for years. As digital and social media become more and more prevalent in the life of learners, it was only a matter of time before learning became 'blended' by necessity.

Finding The Model That Works For Your School, Classroom, And Students

In The Definition Of Blended Learning, we offered that 'blended learning is a model that combines online and face-to-face learning spaces and experiences.' Below, we identify and describe 12 different types of blended learning.

Obviously, there aren't just 12. It could be argued that there are thousands of types of blended learning varying by content, scale, technology, learning spaces, etc.

The purpose of this post is to A) Explain the most commonly referred to types of blended learning as most educators know them and B) Help you think more about blended learning as a flexible concept that ideally empowers both teachers and students to improve learning outcomes so that you can C) Identify and adapt a blended learning model that's right for your school, classroom, and students.

6 Types Of Blended Learning You've Probably Heard Of

1. Station Rotation Blended Learning

Station-Rotation blended learning is a: "...model (that) allows students to rotate through stations on a fixed schedule, where at least one of the stations is an online learning station. This model is most common in elementary schools because teachers are already familiar with rotating in centers and stations.
Similar to: Lab Rotation Blended Learning
Primarily characterized by: the fixed schedule that guides the 'blending'

2. Lab Rotation Blended Learning

'The Lab Rotation' model of blended learning, similar to "Station Rotation,' works by "allow(ing) students to rotate through stations on a fixed schedule...in a dedicated computer lab allow(ing) for flexible scheduling arrangements with teachers...enabl(ing) schools to make use of existing computer labs."
Similar to: Station Rotation Blended Learning
Primarily characterized by: the use school computer labs in new ways

3. Remote Blended Learning (also referred to as Enriched Virtual)

In Enriched Virtual blended learning, the student's focus is on completing online coursework while only meeting with the teacher intermittently/as-needed.

This approach differs from the Flipped Classroom model in the balance of online to face-to-face instructional time. In an Enriched Virtual blended learning model, students wouldn't see/work with/learning from a teacher on a daily basis face-to-face but would in a 'flipped' setting.
Similar to: A mix of Self-Directed, Flex Blended Learning, Flipped Classroom
Primarily characterized by: students completely coursework remotely and independently.

4. Flex Blended Learning

The 'Flex' is included in types of Blended Learning and its model is one in which... "a course or subject in which online learning is the backbone of student learning, even if it directs students to offline activities at times. Students move on an individually customized, ﬂuid schedule among learning modalities. The teacher of record is on-site, and students learn mostly on the brick-and-mortar campus, except for any homework assignments. The teacher of record or other adults provide face-to-face support on a flexible and adaptive as-needed basis through activities such as small-group instruction, group projects, and individual tutoring."
Similar to: Remote blended learning, Inside-Out Blended Learning
Primarily characterized by: its versatility to meet the needs of a variety of formal and informal learning processes (schools, organizations, homeschooling, etc.)

5. The 'Flipped Classroom' Blended Learning

Perhaps the most widely known version of blended learning, a 'Flipped Classroom' is one where students are introduced to content at home, and practice working through it at school supported by a teacher and/or peers. In this way, traditional roles for each space are 'flipped.'
Similar to: Remote Blended Learning
Primarily characterized by: the retention of traditional learning forms in new contexts (i.e., studying at school and learning at home)

6. Individual Rotation Blended Learning

The Individual Rotation model allows students to rotate through stations, but on individual schedules set by a teacher or software algorithm. Unlike other rotation models, students do not necessarily rotate to every station; they rotate only to the activities scheduled on their playlists."
Similar to: Mastery-Based Blended Learning
Primarily characterized by: the personalization of student learning as determined by individual schedules that have the chance to better meet the needs of each student

6 Types Of Blended Learning You Probably Haven't Heard Of

7. Project-Based Blended Learning

Blended Project-Based Learning is a model in which the student uses both online learning-either in the form of courses or self-directed access-and face-to-face instruction and collaboration to design, iterate, and publish project-based learning assignments, products, and related artifacts.
Similar to: Self-Directed Blended Learning, Outside-In Blended Learning
Primarily characterized by: the use of online resources to support project-based learning

8. Self-Directed Blended Learning

In Self-Directed blended learning, students use a combination of online and face-to-face learning to guide their own personalized inquiry, achieve formal learning goals, connect with mentors physically and digitally, etc. As the learning is self-directed, the roles of 'online learning' and physical teachers change, and there are no formal online courses to complete.

In Self-Directed blended learning, one challenge for teachers is to be able to judge the and (somehow) success of the learning experience without de-authenticating it.

For students, the challenge is to seek out models of products, processes, and potential that can provide the kind of spark that can sustain learning while being self-aware enough to know what's working and why, and to make adjustments accordingly. Some students need very little to soar, while others need support through very clear pathways that they can guide themselves through with autonomy and self-criticism.
Similar to: Inside-Out Blending Learning, Project-Based Blended Learning
Primarily characterized by: the exchange of traditional academic work for student-centered inquiry

9. Inside-Out Blended Learning

In Inside-Out blended learning, experiences are planned to 'finish' or 'end up' beyond the physical classroom, but still require and benefit from the unique advantages of both physical and digital spaces.

In both the Outside-In and Inside-Out models, the nature of the 'online learning' is less critical than the focus on platforms, spaces, people, and opportunity beyond the school walls. (The 'online' components could be self-directed inquiry and/or formal eLearning courses and curriculum.)

Because the learning pattern is 'outward,' Project-Based blended learning is an excellent example of the Inside-Out learning model.

As with Outside-In blended learning, there is a need for expert guidance, learning feedback, content teaching, and psychological and moral support from face-to-face interactions on a daily basis.

Well-designed, each of the three 'areas' plays to its strengths and complements the other two.
Similar to: Outside-In blended learning, Blended Project-Based Learning
Primarily characterized by: student movement between digital and physical spaces

10. Outside-In Blended Learning

In Outside-In blended learning, experiences are planned to 'start' in the non-academic physical and digital environments students use on a daily basis, but finish inside a classroom.

This could mean traditional letter grades and assessment forms, or less traditional teaching and learning that simply uses the classroom as a 'closed-circuit' publishing 'platform'-a safe space to share, be creative, collaborate, and give and receive feedback that grows student work.

Well-designed, each of the three 'areas' plays to its strengths and complements the other two. While the pattern is Outside-In, unlike Remote blended learning there is still a need for guidance, teaching, and support from face-to-face interactions on a daily basis.
Similar to: Inside-Out Blended Learning
Primarily characterized by: student movement between digital and physical spaces; the potential authenticity of student work

11. Supplemental Blended Learning

In this model, students complete either entirely online work to supplement their day-to-day face-to-face learning, or entirely face-to-face learning experiences to supplement the learning gained in online courses and activities.

The big idea here is supplementing -critical learning objectives are met entirely in one space while the 'opposite' space provides the student with specific supplementing experiences that the other did not or could not provide.

12. Mastery-Based Blended Learning

Students rotate between online and face-to-face learning (activities, assessments, projects, etc.) based on the completion of mastery-based learning objectives.

Assessment design is crucial in any mastery-based learning experience; the ability to use face-to-face and digital assessment tools is either powerful or 'complicated' depending on the mindset of the learning designer.
*Sources include TeachThought, the Christensen Institute and blendedlearning.org

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
12 Of The Most Common Types Of Blended Learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
From Station Rotation and Mastery-Based Learning to the Flipped Classroom, let's take a look at the most common types of Blended Learning.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The education field has gone through significant changes in recent years. As teachers strive to help students engage with their learning in deep and meaningful ways, new strategies help them reach these goals. Blended learning models represent an innovative way to promote student success.

What Is a Blended Learning Model?

Blended learning models are methods for encouraging hybrid learning. Schools and teachers create experiences and opportunities that combine face-to-face learning with distance learning.

Blended learning began primarily as an approach designed to augment traditional instruction methods for students who attended classes in a physical school building all day, every day. However, these methods have also been leveraged to support a combination of in-person education and at-home learning. There are several different, distinct models, but they all share several important aspects.

What Are the Characteristics of Blended Learning Models?

Blended learning models usually leverage a combination of in-person instruction techniques, teacher-led online modules, and self-paced learning. Students may participate in a combination of independent study, small group learning, and whole-class instruction, whether online or in person. Often, schools use elements of station rotation, a situation in which individual learners or small groups shift among the various learning configurations, on their own or according to a predetermined schedule.

Regardless of which model is employed, ASCD recommends that educators incorporate the following attributes as they design blended learning experiences:

Attention-grabbing content introductions that activate student engagement.

Modeling and chunking strategies for helping students develop new skills.

Checks for understanding and assessments that align with learning goals.

Opportunities for interacting with other students to collaborate and process together.

Scaffolding encourages learners to connect their understanding with meaningful scenarios.

Types of Blended Learning Models

There are a variety of different models for facilitating blended learning. Some level of overlap exists among the various definitions, and the exact parameters of each model are subject to interpretation. Still, these categories describe the prevailing models for blended instruction.

Each model differs somewhat in terms of teacher responsibilities, administrative requirements, and instructional emphasis. In addition, schools may choose to alter or adapt how and when students move between their homes and the school for various types of learning. All blended learning models allow for some flexibility in how they are implemented.

The Flipped Classroom Model
Flipped classrooms give teachers the opportunity to facilitate the completion of educational projects and to support students as they practice using concepts learned independently. In a blended learning environment, teacher-led exercises can take place in person while individual study occurs at home using online modules or video lectures.

A recent EdSurge article noted that educators often use the face-to-face component of this model for:

Class discussions.

Group work.

Delivering insights related to higher-order thinking.

Troubleshooting specific misunderstandings.

The Enriched Virtual Model
This method is similar to the flipped classroom. Students learn primarily online, though face-to-face sessions with the teacher are also required. While the flipped classroom can be thought of as reversing the original order of instruction compared to traditional learning environments, the enriched virtual model starts with remote instruction as its origin. Online teaching is then supplemented with mandatory in-person educational experiences.

The Individual Rotation Model
The individual rotation model can be employed in a variety of different educational settings, including in blended learning models. An educational resource from the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction describes how students in this configuration will be sorted by their teacher or specialized software into unique educational pathways based on their needs. Learning opportunities include independent study, small groups, collaboration, lessons conducted by the teacher for the whole group, and individualized interventions. Fixed schedules may be used in place of customized learning journeys if needed, and various stations can be completed online or in person. For a fully in-person experience, students can participate in independent learning on a lab rotation schedule. Libraries and computer labs connect students directly to learning materials.

The Flex Model
This is a self-paced, student-driven model. According to the book Learning in the Digital Age, flex models were originally devised to assist returning students who had not completed their high school education. While educators construct learning opportunities for their students and support their progress as needed, individual learners proceed through modules on their own. This level of independence may be better suited to older students. In-person components of the model can be used for intervention opportunities, breakout rooms, lab exercises, and collaboration.

The A La Carte Model
The a la carte model also involves a certain amount of student self-direction, this time at the level of individual course selection. Classes offered by the school are completed as they normally would be, while learners can choose from a menu of a la carte options for supplemental topics. These individual classes are often conducted entirely online with a remote teacher of record. The student may complete this portion of their education from home or using the technology available inside their school building. A research brief from the Philadelphia Education Research Consortium noted that a la carte models can expand educational offerings beyond what the school is capable of providing for students by itself.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The education field has gone through significant changes in recent years. As teachers strive to help students engage with their learning in deep and meaningful ways, new strategies help them reach these goals. Blended learning models represent an innovative way to promote student success. Blended learning models are methods for encouraging hybrid learning.

# data[].attributes.body
Blended learning offers a number of benefits for students and help them do their work online. Some of the characteristics of blended learning include offering technology and other types of support for students, helping them become independent learners and letting them interact with their peers.

# data[].attributes.headline
What is Blended Learning and How Can It Be Used?

# data[].attributes.subject
What is Blended Learning and How Can It Be Used?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What Is Blended Learning?

Blended learning is a learning approach that combines instructor-led brick-and-mortar classroom training and online learning activities.

Unlike full-fledged eLearning, the online portion of the training doesn't replace face-to-face training with a teacher; teachers incorporate technology to enhance the learning experience and broaden understanding of certain topics. For example, they can share a link to a video and offer students to watch it at home, email their review to a teacher, and then discuss it in class.

Here are some more examples of how it works:

Learners work on projects in groups.

Learners meet in a classroom to collaborate and contribute to the project.

Learners use channels in messengers, online communities, and task managers to plan their work and control the flow. They also use file-sharing services (e.g., Google Docs) to collaborate and share feedback on the project.

Learners practice foreign language conversation in pairs or small groups.

Learners are divided into groups during a lesson and talk about a particular topic.

In addition to classroom discussions, learners use online services for text and voice chat (e.g., Discord).

Assessment.

Learners write essays and take mid-term tests and final exams.

Learners' progress is evaluated by their activity statistics; they take online quizzes and tests, submit digital items, and take part in peer reviews.

However, it would be a mistake to say that blended learning is just live training complemented with some additional online resources.

What Is the Difference Between Hybrid and Blended Learning?

Along with blended learning, there is hybrid learning. These two learning approaches are often mistakenly considered synonymous. Although they both signify a type of mixture, there is a significant difference between them.

In hybrid learning, a teacher or instructor delivers materials to learners, some of whom attend class in person, while others join the class virtually from home. In this case, the educator will teach remote and physically present students at the same time using tools like video conferencing hardware and software.

Blended learning, on the other hand, combines in-person teaching with online learning methods. So, learners can listen to a lecture in a classroom and then take an online quiz right there or at home.

Think of a hybrid car and a blender. A hybrid car combines two types of fuel, just as hybrid learning combines two types of learning environments. And a blender mixes whatever you put in it, and similarly, blended learning combines multiple types of learning content.

Benefits of Blended Learning

If you're thinking about implementing blended learning, you'll probably want to know whether it's worth the trouble. So, take a look at some of the advantages of blended learning for learners (students or employees) and organizations (schools, universities, or companies):

Safer learning environment

Interactive learning process

Learner autonomy

Greater learner engagement

Better comprehension

Detailed analytics

Let's take a closer look at each of them in turn.

Benefits of blended learning for learners

Safer learning environment

If there's anything 2020 taught us, it's that being in one place with a bunch of other people can have its complications. And seeing those people only on the screen is unbearable. The blended approach makes learning safer by reducing the number of hours learners spend together offline but still provides them with live communication.

Interactive learning process

Theoretical materials can be challenging (if not boring). It's one thing when learners sit and listen to a speaker for a few hours. And it's radically different when they learn that same information by clicking on buttons, participating in a dialogue simulation, taking a game-like course, and so on. Acquiring new knowledge can be fun, and blended learning provides lots of tools to make it so.

Learner autonomy

Being able to control and schedule an individual learning path is essential for learners - and especially adults. Learning isn't the only (and hardly the most important) activity of students and employees. Work, family, hobbies, and friends - people's lives are made up of many facets, and learning shouldn't become an obstacle. In blended learning, learners can access courses 24/7 - whenever they want it and have the opportunity.

Benefits of blended learning for organizations

Greater learner engagement

No business or institution wants to force its employees or students to learn, because it won't work. You need to engage learners in learning to make it effective. And, according to this study conducted in 2019, blended learning leads to greater learner engagement by providing different opportunities and using digital tools.

Better comprehension

One of the most popular blended learning models, called the " flipped classroom," results in better comprehension by having learners study all theoretical materials alone at their own pace and practice new knowledge and skills during in-person sessions.

Detailed analytics

How much time did it take a learner to finish a quiz? How many attempts did they make? Do they have any expiring tasks? Can you answer these questions with classroom learning? Probably, yes. But how much time will you spend collecting all this information on each and every employee or student? With blended learning, you won't even spend a minute - a learning management system will do everything for you. Based on learner progress, you'll be able to see how competent a learner is at specific topics, whether they are ready to move forward or need to revise some materials, and much more.

Disadvantages of Blended Learning

Now that you know the 'why' of blended learning, let's also look at the 'why not.' Here are the cons of this learning approach:

New skill set for teachers/instructors

Plagiarism

Higher cost

Let's look at each of these aspects more closely.

New skill set for teachers/instructors

Blended learning requires particular digital competence, as instructors need to create online courses, assign them to students, monitor their progress, and much more. Some eLearning tools have a steep learning curve, and not all teachers might be willing to invest the time and trouble needed to master a new technological tool.

A new skill set also refers to the fact that digitally inexperienced teachers may give too much content to study just because they don't have classroom time limits and think: "Well, it's not that much. And learners are at home, so they have lots of spare time." And this could lead to cognitive overload on the part of the learners.

Plagiarism

The more eLearning content you create, the greater the risk of plagiarism. Instructors might do this by accident, such as if they find an image that highlights their idea and add it to their online course, whereas the image is protected by copyright. If this occurs, it's the company or university that might get into trouble.

Higher cost

If you use eLearning, you pay for eLearning software. If you have classroom learning, you pay for light, gas, equipment, etc. And if you have blended learning, you pay for everything.

However, these disadvantages will not become an issue if you use these tips:

1. Choose easy-to-use eLearning tools.

2. Explain the peculiarities of the digital learning process to your teachers or instructors.

3. Determine your learning needs, calculate your budget, and find the tools that satisfy both issues.

Blended Learning Models

The most difficult thing about launching blended learning is that the technique is extremely flexible. The variety of strategies, tools, and the need to balance everything will likely make even experienced learning professionals feel overwhelmed and confused.

We would like to highlight six principal blended learning models here:

1. Face-to-face driver model

This model is the closest to traditional classroom training. This approach usually means that not everyone in the class will take additional online training, as it mainly targets the individual needs of those learners who are struggling or would like to go above and beyond.

2. Online driver model

This model is the opposite of brick-and-mortar studying, as it relies entirely on a digital delivery of the training. It combines both synchronous training (live webinars, peer-to-peer training sessions, etc.) and asynchronous training (self-paced study of ecourses). With the online driver model, there's usually no need for live face-to-face meetings, but they can be arranged if necessary.

3. Rotation model

This model involves breaking a group of learners into smaller units to perform different types of tasks at different stages in turns. Some activities are online and some are realized in person. This allows learners with different types of learning styles to get the maximum benefit from the training.

4. Flipped classroom

The motto of this model is "online learning, offline application." With a flipped classroom, lectures and practical homework elements are reversed. Learners study new content at home before the class, and in-class time is devoted to active learning and applying the newly learned skills. This can be accomplished in the form of discussions, case studies, or project work. The instructor's task is to guide the learners by answering questions and supporting them in the application of course concepts.

5. Flex model

The Flex model allows learners to have control over their learning. Students or employees can move from one activity to another according to their needs. Activities can be both online and offline. Teachers or instructors are always on-site to instruct and help learners if necessary.

6. Individual rotation model

Here, learners also move from one station to another, but it is the teacher (or instructor) or a special algorithm that sets an individual path. Students or employees don't need to visit all the stations - only the ones that are on their schedule.

How to Launch Blended Learning in 5 Steps

Let's say you've decided that blended learning matches your learning needs. What should you do next? Follow this step-by-step guide to launching blended learning in your organization:

Step 1: Set blended learning goals

Determine what goals and objectives you expect to achieve with blended learning. For example, you might want learners to become more involved and independent in their education. Or you might wish to provide more collaborative opportunities for students or employees to develop their social skills.

Step 2: Choose a blended learning model

Based on the goals you set, select the blended learning model that fits best. You can use more than one model, but be prepared to maintain all of them further on. Note that different models might require various tools and classroom designs.

Step 3: Get the right tools to create and deliver content

To launch the online part of blended learning, you'll need special software. Every business and university has its specific needs, but two tools will be necessary for any of them: an authoring tool to create online content and a learning management system to deliver it and track learner progress. Let's take a closer look at these:

Authoring tool

Given the flexible and customizable nature of blended learning, the authoring tool should enable you to create and update eLearning materials quickly. If you don't have any experience in instructional design and want to create learning materials hassle free, try iSpring Suite. It works as a PowerPoint add-in, so the interface is probably familiar and you can start creating content right away, with no special training.

With iSpring Suite you'll be able to:

Here's what a course made with iSpring looks like:

Get a 14-day iSpring Suite free trial and start creating online courses for your blended learning projects right away.

Learning management system (LMS)

Learning management systems (LMSs) are used to host training materials, deliver them to learners, and generate reports that help you to see if training is successful. Some LMSs can only provide learners with assigned ecourses (so-called asynchronous learning); other solutions allow conducting live online training sessions. Besides, there are some LMSs that enable you to plan and monitor offline session attendance. Such multifunctional LMSs are a perfect fit for blended learning.

If you're new to eLearning, check out the main features that an LMS for blended learning should have:

Access to learning materials via any device

Smooth integration with an authoring tool

Convenient learner enrollment

Both synchronous and asynchronous learning options

Learner communication

Gamification

Detailed analytics on learner progress

iSpring Learn LMS is an example of a platform that corresponds to the criteria mentioned above. This platform offers all the features needed to launch and manage blended learning, and it's fairly simple to use. It takes just a couple of clicks to create your learning portal, upload training content, and add learners. Get a 30-day iSpring Learn free trial to check its capabilities and features yourself.

Step 4: Redesign your learning environment

Depending on the blended learning model you choose, you might need to redesign your classroom. Besides, make sure that the overall classroom design will motivate students to engage in learning and keep them positive.

Step 5: Launch blended learning and be patient

Let your learners in - you're ready! Now, your task is to organize and maintain the learning process. And be patient. It will take at least a few weeks for blended learning to show some results.

Bottom Line

When we talk about digitalization, some of the first examples that may come to mind are Amazon or Uber, where online technology changed the market. At the same time, these online services are strongly tied to the user's offline experience. So is blended learning; it requires you to find a delicate balance between classroom training and eLearning.

Corporate training has come a long way from apprentice workshops to corporate universities. And so has academic learning. Still, there's no way to know for sure, a priori, whether offline learning, online learning, or blended learning will be most effective in your case. Effective training is and has always been learner-centric; whatever strategy you choose, you can't go wrong by putting your learners above everything else and then optimizing the rest as you go.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What is Blended Learning? Types, Examples & More

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Blended learning is an integration of offline and online elements in training programs. Learn how to combine these two parts to level up your employees.

# data[].attributes.body
YouTube platform is one of the web 2.0 tools that uses in blended learning activities such as experiment. Students can watch the tutorial of an experiment that they are going to conduct through YouTube.

# data[].attributes.body
Kahoot! is a web 2.0 tool that provide the are able to conduct the blended learning activities such as the competition among the class by grouping. Students can enjoy the quiz and cooperate with their peers during the games. This can enhance their learning skills and also their team work.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Run pulse-checks with quiz, polls and other questions to collect valuable student feedback. For example, pre-assess knowledge, or find out how students are feeling in general. Kahoot!'s visual reports on live games and challenges will help you with formative assessment: see how the class performed, identify difficult questions that need followup, and reinforce learning.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Online games | Kahoot! - Your distance learning platform

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Inspire your students to play thousands of online games. Reach students even when they're not at school with Kahoot!

# data[].attributes.body
Padlet is a common blended learning tools used by most of the teachers. This is because it provides a lot of features and allow students to create their own mind map according to the chapter they learnt. Teachers can also insert the teaching video in the Padlet for the student to do their revision.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What is Padlet?
Padlet is an Internet application that allows people to express their thoughts on a common topic easily. It works like an online sheet of paper or wall, where anyone with the link can put any content (e.g. images, videos, documents, text) anywhere on the page, together with anyone, from any device.
You can:

Type

Add Hyperlinks

Add Photos or Videos

Add Documents

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What is Padlet? Padlet is an Internet application that allows people to express their thoughts on a common topic easily. It works like an online sheet of paper or wall, where anyone with the link can put any content (e.g. images, videos, documents, text) anywhere on the page, together with anyone, from any device.

# data[].attributes.body
Let's do some exercise :)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Wordwall - Create better lessons quicker

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Crossword - Use the clues to solve the crossword. Tap on a word and type in the answer.

# data[].attributes.body
Some activities can also be done out from the teaching time in the class. Webex is one of tools that can provide live conversation by using online gadget. Student can do an online forum or debate using webex at anytime and anywhere they like. This type of activity can help students and teachers settling their times problems that cause by doing activities with teacher at school.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education 14, Article number: 7 (2017) Cite this article

708k Accesses

184 Citations

29 Altmetric

Metrics

Abstract

This paper investigates the effectiveness of a blended learning environment through analyzing the relationship between student characteristics/background, design features and learning outcomes. It is aimed at determining the significant predictors of blended learning effectiveness taking student characteristics/background and design features as independent variables and learning outcomes as dependent variables. A survey was administered to 238 respondents to gather data on student characteristics/background, design features and learning outcomes. The final semester evaluation results were used as a measure for performance as an outcome. We applied the online self regulatory learning questionnaire for data on learner self regulation, the intrinsic motivation inventory for data on intrinsic motivation and other self-developed instruments for measuring the other constructs. Multiple regression analysis results showed that blended learning design features (technology quality, online tools and face-to-face support) and student characteristics (attitudes and self-regulation) predicted student satisfaction as an outcome. The results indicate that some of the student characteristics/backgrounds and design features are significant predictors for student learning outcomes in blended learning.

Introduction

The teaching and learning environment is embracing a number of innovations and some of these involve the use of technology through blended learning. This innovative pedagogical approach has been embraced rapidly though it goes through a process. The introduction of blended learning (combination of face-to-face and online teaching and learning) initiatives is part of these innovations but its uptake, especially in the developing world faces challenges for it to be an effective innovation in teaching and learning. Blended learning effectiveness has quite a number of underlying factors that pose challenges. One big challenge is about how users can successfully use the technology and ensuring participants' commitment given the individual learner characteristics and encounters with technology (Hofmann, 2014). Hofmann adds that users getting into difficulties with technology may result into abandoning the learning and eventual failure of technological applications. In a report by Oxford Group ( 2013), some learners (16%) had negative attitudes to blended learning while 26% were concerned that learners would not complete study in blended learning. Learners are important partners in any learning process and therefore, their backgrounds and characteristics affect their ability to effectively carry on with learning and being in blended learning, the design tools to be used may impinge on the effectiveness in their learning.

This study tackles blended learning effectiveness which has been investigated in previous studies considering grades, course completion, retention and graduation rates but no studies regarding effectiveness in view of learner characteristics/background, design features and outcomes have been done in the Ugandan university context. No studies have also been done on how the characteristics of learners and design features are predictors of outcomes in the context of a planning evaluation research (Guskey, 2000) to establish the effectiveness of blended learning. Guskey ( 2000) noted that planning evaluation fits in well since it occurs before the implementation of any innovation as well as allowing planners to determine the needs, considering participant characteristics, analyzing contextual matters and gathering baseline information. This study is done in the context of a plan to undertake innovative pedagogy involving use of a learning management system (moodle) for the first time in teaching and learning in a Ugandan university. The learner characteristics/backgrounds being investigated for blended learning effectiveness include self-regulation, computer competence, workload management, social and family support, attitude to blended learning, gender and age. We investigate the blended learning design features of learner interactions, face-to-face support, learning management system tools and technology quality while the outcomes considered include satisfaction, performance, intrinsic motivation and knowledge construction. Establishing the significant predictors of outcomes in blended learning will help to inform planners of such learning environments in order to put in place necessary groundwork preparations for designing blended learning as an innovative pedagogical approach.

Kenney and Newcombe ( 2011) did their comparison to establish effectiveness in view of grades and found that blended learning had higher average score than the non-blended learning environment. Garrison and Kanuka ( 2004) examined the transformative potential of blended learning and reported an increase in course completion rates, improved retention and increased student satisfaction. Comparisons between blended learning environments have been done to establish the disparity between academic achievement, grade dispersions and gender performance differences and no significant differences were found between the groups (Demirkol & Kazu, 2014).

However, blended learning effectiveness may be dependent on many other factors and among them student characteristics, design features and learning outcomes. Research shows that the failure of learners to continue their online education in some cases has been due to family support or increased workload leading to learner dropout (Park & Choi, 2009) as well as little time for study. Additionally, it is dependent on learner interactions with instructors since failure to continue with online learning is attributed to this. In Greer, Hudson & Paugh's study as cited in Park and Choi ( 2009), family and peer support for learners is important for success in online and face-to-face learning. Support is needed for learners from all areas in web-based courses and this may be from family, friends, co-workers as well as peers in class. Greer, Hudson and Paugh further noted that peer encouragement assisted new learners in computer use and applications. The authors also show that learners need time budgeting, appropriate technology tools and support from friends and family in web-based courses. Peer support is required by learners who have no or little knowledge of technology, especially computers, to help them overcome fears. Park and Choi, ( 2009) showed that organizational support significantly predicts learners' stay and success in online courses because employers at times are willing to reduce learners' workload during study as well as supervisors showing that they are interested in job-related learning for employees to advance and improve their skills.

The study by Kintu and Zhu ( 2016) investigated the possibility of blended learning in a Ugandan University and examined whether student characteristics (such as self-regulation, attitudes towards blended learning, computer competence) and student background (such as family support, social support and management of workload) were significant factors in learner outcomes (such as motivation, satisfaction, knowledge construction and performance). The characteristics and background factors were studied along with blended learning design features such as technology quality, learner interactions, and Moodle with its tools and resources. The findings from that study indicated that learner attitudes towards blended learning were significant factors to learner satisfaction and motivation while workload management was a significant factor to learner satisfaction and knowledge construction. Among the blended learning design features, only learner interaction was a significant factor to learner satisfaction and knowledge construction.

The focus of the present study is on examining the effectiveness of blended learning taking into consideration learner characteristics/background, blended learning design elements and learning outcomes and how the former are significant predictors of blended learning effectiveness.

Studies like that of Morris and Lim ( 2009) have investigated learner and instructional factors influencing learning outcomes in blended learning. They however do not deal with such variables in the contexts of blended learning design as an aspect of innovative pedagogy involving the use of technology in education. Apart from the learner variables such as gender, age, experience, study time as tackled before, this study considers social and background aspects of the learners such as family and social support, self-regulation, attitudes towards blended learning and management of workload to find out their relationship to blended learning effectiveness. Identifying the various types of learner variables with regard to their relationship to blended learning effectiveness is important in this study as we embark on innovative pedagogy with technology in teaching and learning.

Literature review

This review presents research about blended learning effectiveness from the perspective of learner characteristics/background, design features and learning outcomes. It also gives the factors that are considered to be significant for blended learning effectiveness. The selected elements are as a result of the researcher's experiences at a Ugandan university where student learning faces challenges with regard to learner characteristics and blended learning features in adopting the use of technology in teaching and learning. We have made use of Loukis, Georgiou, and Pazalo ( 2007) value flow model for evaluating an e-learning and blended learning service specifically considering the effectiveness evaluation layer. This evaluates the extent of an e-learning system usage and the educational effectiveness. In addition, studies by Leidner, Jarvenpaa, Dillon and Gunawardena as cited in Selim ( 2007) have noted three main factors that affect e-learning and blended learning effectiveness as instructor characteristics, technology and student characteristics. Heinich, Molenda, Russell, and Smaldino ( 2001) showed the need for examining learner characteristics for effective instructional technology use and showed that user characteristics do impact on behavioral intention to use technology. Research has dealt with learner characteristics that contribute to learner performance outcomes. They have dealt with emotional intelligence, resilience, personality type and success in an online learning context (Berenson, Boyles, & Weaver, 2008). Dealing with the characteristics identified in this study will give another dimension, especially for blended learning in learning environment designs and add to specific debate on learning using technology. Lin and Vassar, ( 2009) indicated that learner success is dependent on ability to cope with technical difficulty as well as technical skills in computer operations and internet navigation. This justifies our approach in dealing with the design features of blended learning in this study.

Learner characteristics/background and blended learning effectiveness

Studies indicate that student characteristics such as gender play significant roles in academic achievement (Oxford Group, 2013), but no study examines performance of male and female as an important factor in blended learning effectiveness. It has again been noted that the success of e- and blended learning is highly dependent on experience in internet and computer applications (Picciano & Seaman, 2007). Rigorous discovery of such competences can finally lead to a confirmation of high possibilities of establishing blended learning. Research agrees that the success of e-learning and blended learning can largely depend on students as well as teachers gaining confidence and capability to participate in blended learning (Hadad, 2007). Shraim and Khlaif ( 2010) note in their research that 75% of students and 72% of teachers were lacking in skills to utilize ICT based learning components due to insufficient skills and experience in computer and internet applications and this may lead to failure in e-learning and blended learning. It is therefore pertinent that since the use of blended learning applies high usage of computers, computer competence is necessary (Abubakar & Adetimirin, 2015) to avoid failure in applying technology in education for learning effectiveness. Rovai, ( 2003) noted that learners' computer literacy and time management are crucial in distance learning contexts and concluded that such factors are meaningful in online classes. This is supported by Selim ( 2007) that learners need to posses time management skills and computer skills necessary for effectiveness in e- learning and blended learning. Self-regulatory skills of time management lead to better performance and learners' ability to structure the physical learning environment leads to efficiency in e-learning and blended learning environments. Learners need to seek helpful assistance from peers and teachers through chats, email and face-to-face meetings for effectiveness (Lynch & Dembo, 2004). Factors such as learners' hours of employment and family responsibilities are known to impede learners' process of learning, blended learning inclusive (Cohen, Stage, Hammack, & Marcus, 2012). It was also noted that a common factor in failure and learner drop-out is the time conflict which is compounded by issues of family, employment status as well as management support (Packham, Jones, Miller, & Thomas, 2004). A study by Thompson ( 2004) shows that work, family, insufficient time and study load made learners withdraw from online courses.

Learner attitudes to blended learning can result in its effectiveness and these shape behavioral intentions which usually lead to persistence in a learning environment, blended inclusive. Selim, ( 2007) noted that the learners' attitude towards e-learning and blended learning are success factors for these learning environments. Learner performance by age and gender in e-learning and blended learning has been found to indicate no significant differences between male and female learners and different age groups (i.e. young, middle-aged and old above 45 years) (Coldwell, Craig, Paterson, & Mustard, 2008). This implies that the potential for blended learning to be effective exists and is unhampered by gender or age differences.

Blended learning design features

The design features under study here include interactions, technology with its quality, face-to-face support and learning management system tools and resources.

Research shows that absence of learner interaction causes failure and eventual drop-out in online courses (Willging & Johnson, 2009) and the lack of learner connectedness was noted as an internal factor leading to learner drop-out in online courses (Zielinski, 2000). It was also noted that learners may not continue in e- and blended learning if they are unable to make friends thereby being disconnected and developing feelings of isolation during their blended learning experiences (Willging & Johnson, 2009). Learners' Interactions with teachers and peers can make blended learning effective as its absence makes learners withdraw (Astleitner, 2000). Loukis, Georgious and Pazalo (2007) noted that learners' measuring of a system's quality, reliability and ease of use leads to learning efficiency and can be so in blended learning. Learner success in blended learning may substantially be affected by system functionality (Pituch & Lee, 2006) and may lead to failure of such learning initiatives (Shrain, 2012). It is therefore important to examine technology quality for ensuring learning effectiveness in blended learning. Tselios, Daskalakis, and Papadopoulou ( 2011) investigated learner perceptions after a learning management system use and found out that the actual system use determines the usefulness among users. It is again noted that a system with poor response time cannot be taken to be useful for e-learning and blended learning especially in cases of limited bandwidth (Anderson, 2004). In this study, we investigate the use of Moodle and its tools as a function of potential effectiveness of blended learning.

The quality of learning management system content for learners can be a predictor of good performance in e-and blended learning environments and can lead to learner satisfaction. On the whole, poor quality technology yields no satisfaction by users and therefore the quality of technology significantly affects satisfaction (Piccoli, Ahmad, & Ives, 2001). Continued navigation through a learning management system increases use and is an indicator of success in blended learning (Delone & McLean, 2003). The efficient use of learning management system and its tools improves learning outcomes in e-learning and blended learning environments.

It is noted that learner satisfaction with a learning management system can be an antecedent factor for blended learning effectiveness. Goyal and Tambe ( 2015) noted that learners showed an appreciation to Moodle's contribution in their learning. They showed positivity with it as it improved their understanding of course material (Ahmad & Al-Khanjari, 2011). The study by Goyal and Tambe ( 2015) used descriptive statistics to indicate improved learning by use of uploaded syllabus and session plans on Moodle. Improved learning is also noted through sharing study material, submitting assignments and using the calendar. Learners in the study found Moodle to be an effective educational tool.

In blended learning set ups, face-to-face experiences form part of the blend and learner positive attitudes to such sessions could mean blended learning effectiveness. A study by Marriot, Marriot, and Selwyn ( 2004) showed learners expressing their preference for face-to-face due to its facilitation of social interaction and communication skills acquired from classroom environment. Their preference for the online session was only in as far as it complemented the traditional face-to-face learning. Learners in a study by Osgerby ( 2013) had positive perceptions of blended learning but preferred face-to-face with its step-by-stem instruction. Beard, Harper and Riley ( 2004) shows that some learners are successful while in a personal interaction with teachers and peers thus prefer face-to-face in the blend. Beard however dealt with a comparison between online and on-campus learning while our study combines both, singling out the face-to-face part of the blend. The advantage found by Beard is all the same relevant here because learners in blended learning express attitude to both online and face-to-face for an effective blend. Researchers indicate that teacher presence in face-to-face sessions lessens psychological distance between them and the learners and leads to greater learning. This is because there are verbal aspects like giving praise, soliciting for viewpoints, humor, etc and non-verbal expressions like eye contact, facial expressions, gestures, etc which make teachers to be closer to learners psychologically (Kelley & Gorham, 2009).

Learner outcomes

The outcomes under scrutiny in this study include performance, motivation, satisfaction and knowledge construction. Motivation is seen here as an outcome because, much as cognitive factors such as course grades are used in measuring learning outcomes, affective factors like intrinsic motivation may also be used to indicate outcomes of learning (Kuo, Walker, Belland, & Schroder, 2013). Research shows that high motivation among online learners leads to persistence in their courses (Menager-Beeley, 2004). Sankaran and Bui ( 2001) indicated that less motivated learners performed poorly in knowledge tests while those with high learning motivation demonstrate high performance in academics (Green, Nelson, Martin, & Marsh, 2006). Lim and Kim, ( 2003) indicated that learner interest as a motivation factor promotes learner involvement in learning and this could lead to learning effectiveness in blended learning.

Learner satisfaction was noted as a strong factor for effectiveness of blended and online courses (Wilging & Johnson, 2009) and dissatisfaction may result from learners' incompetence in the use of the learning management system as an effective learning tool since, as Islam ( 2014) puts it, users may be dissatisfied with an information system due to ease of use. A lack of prompt feedback for learners from course instructors was found to cause dissatisfaction in an online graduate course. In addition, dissatisfaction resulted from technical difficulties as well as ambiguous course instruction Hara and Kling ( 2001). These factors, once addressed, can lead to learner satisfaction in e-learning and blended learning and eventual effectiveness. A study by Blocker and Tucker ( 2001) also showed that learners had difficulties with technology and inadequate group participation by peers leading to dissatisfaction within these design features. Student-teacher interactions are known to bring satisfaction within online courses. Study results by Swan ( 2001) indicated that student-teacher interaction strongly related with student satisfaction and high learner-learner interaction resulted in higher levels of course satisfaction. Descriptive results by Naaj, Nachouki, and Ankit ( 2012) showed that learners were satisfied with technology which was a video-conferencing component of blended learning with a mean of 3.7. The same study indicated student satisfaction with instructors at a mean of 3.8. Askar and Altun, ( 2008) found that learners were satisfied with face-to-face sessions of the blend with t-tests and ANOVA results indicating female scores as higher than for males in the satisfaction with face-to-face environment of the blended learning.

Studies comparing blended learning with traditional face-to-face have indicated that learners perform equally well in blended learning and their performance is unaffected by the delivery method (Kwak, Menezes, & Sherwood, 2013). In another study, learning experience and performance are known to improve when traditional course delivery is integrated with online learning (Stacey & Gerbic, 2007). Such improvement as noted may be an indicator of blended learning effectiveness. Our study however, delves into improved performance but seeks to establish the potential of blended learning effectiveness by considering grades obtained in a blended learning experiment. Score 50 and above is considered a pass in this study's setting and learners scoring this and above will be considered to have passed. This will make our conclusions about the potential of blended learning effectiveness.

Regarding knowledge construction, it has been noted that effective learning occurs where learners are actively involved (Nurmela, Palonen, Lehtinen & Hakkarainen, 2003, cited in Zhu, 2012) and this may be an indicator of learning environment effectiveness. Effective blended learning would require that learners are able to initiate, discover and accomplish the processes of knowledge construction as antecedents of blended learning effectiveness. A study by Rahman, Yasin and Jusoff ( 2011) indicated that learners were able to use some steps to construct meaning through an online discussion process through assignments given. In the process of giving and receiving among themselves, the authors noted that learners learned by writing what they understood. From our perspective, this can be considered to be accomplishment in the knowledge construction process. Their study further shows that learners construct meaning individually from assignments and this stage is referred to as pre-construction which for our study, is an aspect of discovery in the knowledge construction process.

Predictors of blended learning effectiveness

Researchers have dealt with success factors for online learning or those for traditional face-to-face learning but little is known about factors that predict blended learning effectiveness in view of learner characteristics and blended learning design features. This part of our study seeks to establish the learner characteristics/backgrounds and design features that predict blended learning effectiveness with regard to satisfaction, outcomes, motivation and knowledge construction. Song, Singleton, Hill, and Koh ( 2004) examined online learning effectiveness factors and found out that time management (a self-regulatory factor) was crucial for successful online learning. Eom, Wen, and Ashill ( 2006) using a survey found out that interaction, among other factors, was significant for learner satisfaction. Technical problems with regard to instructional design were a challenge to online learners thus not indicating effectiveness (Song et al., 2004), though the authors also indicated that descriptive statistics to a tune of 75% and time management (62%) impact on success of online learning. Arbaugh ( 2000) and Swan ( 2001) indicated that high levels of learner-instructor interaction are associated with high levels of user satisfaction and learning outcomes. A study by Naaj et al. ( 2012) indicated that technology and learner interactions, among other factors, influenced learner satisfaction in blended learning.

Objective and research questions of the current study

The objective of the current study is to investigate the effectiveness of blended learning in view of student satisfaction, knowledge construction, performance and intrinsic motivation and how they are related to student characteristics and blended learning design features in a blended learning environment.

Research questions

1. 1.
What are the student characteristics and blended learning design features for an effective blended learning environment?

2. 2.
Which factors (among the learner characteristics and blended learning design features) predict student satisfaction, learning outcomes, intrinsic motivation and knowledge construction?

Conceptual model of the present study

The reviewed literature clearly shows learner characteristics/background and blended learning design features play a part in blended learning effectiveness and some of them are significant predictors of effectiveness. The conceptual model for our study is depicted as follows (Fig. 1):

Conceptual model of the current study

Method

Research design

This research applies a quantitative design where descriptive statistics are used for the student characteristics and design features data, t-tests for the age and gender variables to determine if they are significant in blended learning effectiveness and regression for predictors of blended learning effectiveness.

This study is based on an experiment in which learners participated during their study using face-to-face sessions and an on-line session of a blended learning design. A learning management system (Moodle) was used and learner characteristics/background and blended learning design features were measured in relation to learning effectiveness. It is therefore a planning evaluation research design as noted by Guskey ( 2000) since the outcomes are aimed at blended learning implementation at MMU. The plan under which the various variables were tested involved face-to-face study at the beginning of a 17 week semester which was followed by online teaching and learning in the second half of the semester. The last part of the semester was for another face-to-face to review work done during the online sessions and final semester examinations. A questionnaire with items on student characteristics, design features and learning outcomes was distributed among students from three schools and one directorate of postgraduate studies.

Participants

Cluster sampling was used to select a total of 238 learners to participate in this study. Out of the whole university population of students, three schools and one directorate were used. From these, one course unit was selected from each school and all the learners following the course unit were surveyed. In the school of Education ( n = 70) and Business and Management Studies ( n = 133), sophomore students were involved due to the fact that they have been introduced to ICT basics during their first year of study. Students of the third year were used from the department of technology in the School of Applied Sciences and Technology ( n = 18) since most of the year two courses had a lot of practical aspects that could not be used for the online learning part. From the Postgraduate Directorate ( n  = 17), first and second year students were selected because learners attend a face-to-face session before they are given paper modules to study away from campus.

The study population comprised of 139 male students representing 58.4% and 99 females representing 41.6% with an average age of 24 years.

Instruments

The end of semester results were used to measure learner performance. The online self-regulated learning questionnaire (Barnard, Lan, To, Paton, & Lai, 2009) and the intrinsic motivation inventory (Deci & Ryan, 1982) were applied to measure the constructs on self regulation in the student characteristics and motivation in the learning outcome constructs. Other self-developed instruments were used for the other remaining variables of attitudes, computer competence, workload management, social and family support, satisfaction, knowledge construction, technology quality, interactions, learning management system tools and resources and face-to-face support.

Instrument reliability

Cronbach's alpha was used to test reliability and the table below gives the results. All the scales and sub-scales had acceptable internal consistency reliabilities as shown in Table 1 below:

Data analysis

First, descriptive statistics was conducted. Shapiro-Wilk test was done to test normality of the data for it to qualify for parametric tests. The test results for normality of our data before the t-test resulted into significant levels (Male = .003, female = .000) thereby violating the normality assumption. We therefore used the skewness and curtosis results which were between −1.0 and +1.0 and assumed distribution to be sufficiently normal to qualify the data for a parametric test, (Pallant, 2010). An independent samples t-test was done to find out the differences in male and female performance to explain the gender characteristics in blended learning effectiveness. A one-way ANOVA between subjects was conducted to establish the differences in performance between age groups. Finally, multiple regression analysis was done between student variables and design elements with learning outcomes to determine the significant predictors for blended learning effectiveness.

Results

Student characteristics, blended learning design features and learning outcomes (RQ1)

A t-test was carried out to establish the performance of male and female learners in the blended learning set up. This was aimed at finding out if male and female learners do perform equally well in blended learning given their different roles and responsibilities in society. It was found that male learners performed slightly better ( M = 62.5) than their female counterparts ( M = 61.1). An independent t-test revealed that the difference between the performances was not statistically significant ( t = 1.569, df = 228, p = 0.05, one tailed). The magnitude of the differences in the means is small with effect size ( d = 0.18). A one way between subjects ANOVA was conducted on the performance of different age groups to establish the performance of learners of young and middle aged age groups (20-30, young & and 31-39, middle aged). This revealed a significant difference in performance (F(1,236 = 8.498, p < . 001).

Average percentages of the items making up the self regulated learning scale are used to report the findings about all the sub-scales in the learner characteristics/background scale. Results show that learner self-regulation was good enough at 72.3% in all the sub-scales of goal setting, environment structuring, task strategies, time management, help-seeking and self-evaluation among learners. The least in the scoring was task strategies at 67.7% and the highest was learner environment structuring at 76.3%. Learner attitude towards blended learning environment is at 76% in the sub-scales of learner autonomy, quality of instructional materials, course structure, course interface and interactions. The least scored here is attitude to course structure at 66% and their attitudes were high on learner autonomy and course interface both at 82%. Results on the learners' computer competences are summarized in percentages in the table below (Table 2):

It can be seen that learners are skilled in word processing at 91%, email at 63.5%, spreadsheets at 68%, web browsers at 70.2% and html tools at 45.4%. They are therefore good enough in word processing and web browsing. Their computer confidence levels are reported at 75.3% and specifically feel very confident when it comes to working with a computer (85.7%). Levels of family and social support for learners during blended learning experiences are at 60.5 and 75% respectively. There is however a low score on learners being assisted by family members in situations of computer setbacks (33.2%) as 53.4% of the learners reported no assistance in this regard. A higher percentage (85.3%) is reported on learners getting support from family regarding provision of essentials for learning such as tuition. A big percentage of learners spend two hours on study while at home (35.3%) followed by one hour (28.2%) while only 9.7% spend more than three hours on study at home. Peers showed great care during the blended learning experience (81%) and their experiences were appreciated by the society (66%). Workload management by learners vis-à-vis studying is good at 60%. Learners reported that their workmates stand in for them at workplaces to enable them do their study in blended learning while 61% are encouraged by their bosses to go and improve their skills through further education and training. On the time spent on other activities not related to study, majority of the learners spend three hours (35%) while 19% spend 6 hours. Sixty percent of the learners have to answer to someone when they are not attending to other activities outside study compared to the 39.9% who do not and can therefore do study or those other activities.

Blended learning design features

The usability of the online system, tools and resources was below average as shown in the table below in percentages (Table 3):

However, learners became skilled at navigating around the learning management system (79%) and it was easy for them to locate course content, tools and resources needed such as course works, news, discussions and journal materials. They effectively used the communication tools (60%) and to work with peers by making posts (57%). They reported that online resources were well organized, user friendly and easy to access (71%) as well as well structured in a clear and understandable manner (72%). They therefore recommended the use of online resources for other course units in future (78%) because they were satisfied with them (64.3%). On the whole, the online resources were fine for the learners (67.2%) and useful as a learning resource (80%). The learners' perceived usefulness/satisfaction with online system, tools, and resources was at 81% as the LMS tools helped them to communicate, work with peers and reflect on their learning (74%). They reported that using moodle helped them to learn new concepts, information and gaining skills (85.3%) as well as sharing what they knew or learned (76.4%). They enjoyed the course units (78%) and improved their skills with technology (89%).

Learner interactions were seen from three angles of cognitivism, collaborative learning and student-teacher interactions. Collaborative learning was average at 50% with low percentages in learners posting challenges to colleagues' ideas online (34%) and posting ideas for colleagues to read online (37%). They however met oftentimes online (60%) and organized how they would work together in study during the face-to-face meetings (69%). The common form of communication medium frequently used by learners during the blended learning experience was by phone (34.5%) followed by whatsapp (21.8%), face book (21%), discussion board (11.8%) and email (10.9%). At the cognitive level, learners interacted with content at 72% by reading the posted content (81%), exchanging knowledge via the LMS (58.4%), participating in discussions on the forum (62%) and got course objectives and structure introduced during the face-to-face sessions (86%). Student-teacher interaction was reported at 71% through instructors individually working with them online (57.2%) and being well guided towards learning goals (81%). They did receive suggestions from instructors about resources to use in their learning (75.3%) and instructors provided learning input for them to come up with their own answers (71%).

The technology quality during the blended learning intervention was rated at 69% with availability of 72%, quality of the resources was at 68% with learners reporting that discussion boards gave right content necessary for study (71%) and the email exchanges containing relevant and much needed information (63.4%) as well as chats comprising of essential information to aid the learning (69%). Internet reliability was rated at 66% with a speed considered averagely good to facilitate online activities (63%). They however reported that there was intermittent breakdown during online study (67%) though they could complete their internet program during connection (63.4%). Learners eventually found it easy to download necessary materials for study in their blended learning experiences (71%).

Learner extent of use of the learning management system features was as shown in the table below in percentage (Table 4):

From the table, very rarely used features include the blog and wiki while very often used ones include the email, forum, chat and calendar.

The effectiveness of the LMS was rated at 79% by learners reporting that they found it useful (89%) and using it makes their learning activities much easier (75.2%). Moodle has helped learners to accomplish their learning tasks more quickly (74%) and that as a LMS, it is effective in teaching and learning (88%) with overall satisfaction levels at 68%. However, learners note challenges in the use of the LMS regarding its performance as having been problematic to them (57%) and only 8% of the learners reported navigation while 16% reported access as challenges.

Learner attitudes towards Face-to-face support were reported at 88% showing that the sessions were enjoyable experiences (89%) with high quality class discussions (86%) and therefore recommended that the sessions should continue in blended learning (89%). The frequency of the face-to-face sessions is shown in the table below as preferred by learners (Table 5).

Learners preferred face-to-face sessions after every month in the semester (33.6%) and at the beginning of the blended learning session only (27.7%).

Learner outcomes

Learners reported high intrinsic motivation levels with interest and enjoyment of tasks at 83.7%, perceived competence at 70.2%, effort/importance sub-scale at 80%, pressure/tension reported at 54%. The pressure percentage of 54% arises from learners feeling nervous (39.2%) and a lot of anxiety (53%) while 44% felt a lot of pressure during the blended learning experiences. Learners however reported the value/usefulness of blended learning at 91% with majority believing that studying online and face-to-face had value for them (93.3%) and were therefore willing to take part in blended learning (91.2%). They showed that it is beneficial for them (94%) and that it was an important way of studying (84.3%).

Learner satisfaction was reported at 81% especially with instructors (85%) high percentage reported on encouraging learner participation during the course of study 93%, course content (83%) with the highest being satisfaction with the good relationship between the objectives of the course units and the content (90%), technology (71%) with a high percentage on the fact that the platform was adequate for the online part of the learning (76%), interactions (75%) with participation in class at 79%, and face-to-face sessions (91%) with learner satisfaction high on face-to-face sessions being good enough for interaction and giving an overview of the courses when objectives were introduced at 92%.

Learners' knowledge construction was reported at 78% with initiation and discovery scales scoring 84% with 88% specifically for discovering the learning points in the course units. The accomplishment scale in knowledge construction scored 71% and specifically the fact that learners were able to work together with group members to accomplish learning tasks throughout the study of the course units (79%). Learners developed reports from activities (67%), submitted solutions to discussion questions (68%) and did critique peer arguments (69%). Generally, learners performed well in blended learning in the final examination with an average pass of 62% and standard deviation of 7.5.

Significant predictors of blended learning effectiveness (RQ 2)

A standard multiple regression analysis was done taking learner characteristics/background and design features as predictor variables and learning outcomes as criterion variables. The data was first tested to check if it met the linear regression test assumptions and results showed the correlations between the independent variables and each of the dependent variables (highest 0.62 and lowest 0.22) as not being too high, which indicated that multicollinearity was not a problem in our model. From the coefficients table, the VIF values ranged from 1.0 to 2.4, well below the cut off value of 10 and indicating no possibility of multicollinearity. The normal probability plot was seen to lie as a reasonably straight diagonal from bottom left to top right indicating normality of our data. Linearity was found suitable from the scatter plot of the standardized residuals and was rectangular in distribution. Outliers were no cause for concern in our data since we had only 1% of all cases falling outside 3.0 thus proving the data as a normally distributed sample. Our R-square values was at 0.525 meaning that the independent variables explained about 53% of the variance in overall satisfaction, motivation and knowledge construction of the learners. All the models explaining the three dependent variables of learner satisfaction, intrinsic motivation and knowledge construction were significant at the 0.000 probability level (Table 6).

From the table above, design features (technology quality and online tools and resources), and learner characteristics (attitudes to blended learning, self-regulation) were significant predictors of learner satisfaction in blended learning. This means that good technology with the features involved and the learner positive attitudes with capacity to do blended learning with self drive led to their satisfaction. The design features (technology quality, interactions) and learner characteristics (self regulation and social support), were found to be significant predictors of learner knowledge construction. This implies that learners' capacity to go on their work by themselves supported by peers and high levels of interaction using the quality technology led them to construct their own ideas in blended learning. Design features (technology quality, online tools and resources as well as learner interactions) and learner characteristics (self regulation), significantly predicted the learners' intrinsic motivation in blended learning suggesting that good technology, tools and high interaction levels with independence in learning led to learners being highly motivated. Finally, none of the independent variables considered under this study were predictors of learning outcomes (grade).

Discussion

In this study we have investigated learning outcomes as dependent variables to establish if particular learner characteristics/backgrounds and design features are related to the outcomes for blended learning effectiveness and if they predict learning outcomes in blended learning. We took students from three schools out of five and one directorate of post-graduate studies at a Ugandan University. The study suggests that the characteristics and design features examined are good drivers towards an effective blended learning environment though a few of them predicted learning outcomes in blended learning.

Student characteristics/background, blended learning design features and learning outcomes

The learner characteristics, design features investigated are potentially important for an effective blended learning environment. Performance by gender shows a balance with no statistical differences between male and female. There are statistically significant differences ( p < .005) in the performance between age groups with means of 62% for age group 20-30 and 67% for age group 31 -39. The indicators of self regulation exist as well as positive attitudes towards blended learning. Learners do well with word processing, e-mail, spreadsheets and web browsers but still lag below average in html tools. They show computer confidence at 75.3%; which gives prospects for an effective blended learning environment in regard to their computer competence and confidence. The levels of family and social support for learners stand at 61 and 75% respectively, indicating potential for blended learning to be effective. The learners' balance between study and work is a drive factor towards blended learning effectiveness since their management of their workload vis a vis study time is at 60 and 61% of the learners are encouraged to go for study by their bosses. Learner satisfaction with the online system and its tools shows prospect for blended learning effectiveness but there are challenges in regard to locating course content and assignments, submitting their work and staying on a task during online study. Average collaborative, cognitive learning as well as learner-teacher interactions exist as important factors. Technology quality for effective blended learning is a potential for effectiveness though features like the blog and wiki are rarely used by learners. Face-to-face support is satisfactory and it should be conducted every month. There is high intrinsic motivation, satisfaction and knowledge construction as well as good performance in examinations ( M  = 62%, SD = 7.5); which indicates potentiality for blended learning effectiveness.

Significant predictors of blended learning effectiveness

Among the design features, technology quality, online tools and face-to-face support are predictors of learner satisfaction while learner characteristics of self regulation and attitudes to blended learning are predictors of satisfaction. Technology quality and interactions are the only design features predicting learner knowledge construction, while social support, among the learner backgrounds, is a predictor of knowledge construction. Self regulation as a learner characteristic is a predictor of knowledge construction. Self regulation is the only learner characteristic predicting intrinsic motivation in blended learning while technology quality, online tools and interactions are the design features predicting intrinsic motivation. However, all the independent variables are not significant predictors of learning performance in blended learning.

The high computer competences and confidence is an antecedent factor for blended learning effectiveness as noted by Hadad ( 2007) and this study finds learners confident and competent enough for the effectiveness of blended learning. A lack in computer skills causes failure in e-learning and blended learning as noted by Shraim and Khlaif ( 2010). From our study findings, this is no threat for blended learning our case as noted by our results. Contrary to Cohen et al. ( 2012) findings that learners' family responsibilities and hours of employment can impede their process of learning, it is not the case here since they are drivers to the blended learning process. Time conflict, as compounded by family, employment status and management support (Packham et al., 2004) were noted as causes of learner failure and drop out of online courses. Our results show, on the contrary, that these factors are drivers for blended learning effectiveness because learners have a good balance between work and study and are supported by bosses to study. In agreement with Selim ( 2007), learner positive attitudes towards e-and blended learning environments are success factors. In line with Coldwell et al. ( 2008), no statistically significant differences exist between age groups. We however note that Coldwel, et al dealt with young, middle-aged and old above 45 years whereas we dealt with young and middle aged only.

Learner interactions at all levels are good enough and contrary to Astleitner, ( 2000) that their absence makes learners withdraw, they are a drive factor here. In line with Loukis (2007) the LMS quality, reliability and ease of use lead to learning efficiency as technology quality, online tools are predictors of learner satisfaction and intrinsic motivation. Face-to-face sessions should continue on a monthly basis as noted here and is in agreement with Marriot et al. ( 2004) who noted learner preference for it for facilitating social interaction and communication skills. High learner intrinsic motivation leads to persistence in online courses as noted by Menager-Beeley, ( 2004) and is high enough in our study. This implies a possibility of an effectiveness blended learning environment. The causes of learner dissatisfaction noted by Islam ( 2014) such as incompetence in the use of the LMS are contrary to our results in our study, while the one noted by Hara and Kling, ( 2001) as resulting from technical difficulties and ambiguous course instruction are no threat from our findings. Student-teacher interaction showed a relation with satisfaction according to Swan ( 2001) but is not a predictor in our study. Initiating knowledge construction by learners for blended learning effectiveness is exhibited in our findings and agrees with Rahman, Yasin and Jusof ( 2011). Our study has not agreed with Eom et al. ( 2006) who found learner interactions as predictors of learner satisfaction but agrees with Naaj et al. ( 2012) regarding technology as a predictor of learner satisfaction.

Conclusion and recommendations

An effective blended learning environment is necessary in undertaking innovative pedagogical approaches through the use of technology in teaching and learning. An examination of learner characteristics/background, design features and learning outcomes as factors for effectiveness can help to inform the design of effective learning environments that involve face-to-face sessions and online aspects. Most of the student characteristics and blended learning design features dealt with in this study are important factors for blended learning effectiveness. None of the independent variables were identified as significant predictors of student performance. These gaps are open for further investigation in order to understand if they can be significant predictors of blended learning effectiveness in a similar or different learning setting.

In planning to design and implement blended learning, we are mindful of the implications raised by this study which is a planning evaluation research for the design and eventual implementation of blended learning. Universities should be mindful of the interplay between the learner characteristics, design features and learning outcomes which are indicators of blended learning effectiveness. From this research, learners manifest high potential to take on blended learning more especially in regard to learner self-regulation exhibited. Blended learning is meant to increase learners' levels of knowledge construction in order to create analytical skills in them. Learner ability to assess and critically evaluate knowledge sources is hereby established in our findings. This can go a long way in producing skilled learners who can be innovative graduates enough to satisfy employment demands through creativity and innovativeness. Technology being less of a shock to students gives potential for blended learning design. Universities and other institutions of learning should continue to emphasize blended learning approaches through installation of learning management systems along with strong internet to enable effective learning through technology especially in the developing world.

References

Download references

Authors' contribution

MJK conceived the study idea, developed the conceptual framework, collected the data, analyzed it and wrote the article. CZ gave the technical advice concerning the write-up and advised on relevant corrections to be made before final submission. EK did the proof-reading of the article as well as language editing. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

1. Mountains of the Moon University, P.O. Box 837, Fort Portal, Uganda

Mugenyi Justice Kintu & Edmond Kagambe

2. Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Pleinlaan 2, Brussels, 1050, Ixelles, Belgium

Mugenyi Justice Kintu & Chang Zhu

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mugenyi Justice Kintu.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kintu, M.J., Zhu, C. & Kagambe, E. Blended learning effectiveness: the relationship between student characteristics, design features and outcomes. Int J Educ Technol High Educ 14, 7 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0043-4
Download citation

Received:

Accepted:

Published:

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0043-4

Keywords

Blended learning effectiveness

Learner characteristics

Design features

Learning outcomes and significant predictors

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Blended learning effectiveness: the relationship between student characteristics, design features and outcomes - International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This paper investigates the effectiveness of a blended learning environment through analyzing the relationship between student characteristics/background, design features and learning outcomes. It is aimed at determining the significant predictors of blended learning effectiveness taking student characteristics/background and design features as independent variables and learning outcomes as dependent variables.

# data[].attributes.headline
The Definition of Blended Learning in Higher Education

# data[].attributes.subject
The Definition of Blended Learning in Higher Education

# data[].attributes.headline
9 MUST HAVE BLENDED LEARNING APPS, TOOLS, AND RESOURCES

# data[].attributes.subject
9 MUST HAVE BLENDED LEARNING APPS, TOOLS, AND RESOURCES

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
9 Must Have Blended Learning Apps, Tools, and Resources

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Spread the loveStudents in all educational settings are self-selecting blended learning. What this actually consists of varies depending on the opportunities, policies, and student preferences. An app well-suited for blended learning needs to make learning seamless across time and space. This seamless experience is essential when considering learner flow and cognitive demands.

# data[].attributes.headline
Blended Learning: What It Is, Why It Matters & How to Apply

# data[].attributes.subject
Blended Learning: What It Is, Why It Matters & How to Apply

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Blended learning is an educational approach that combines both traditional ways of teaching (e.g., inside the classroom) and online ways of teaching, through a series of online educational materials and interactive activities.

If you are an educator interested in getting to know more about blended learning, you have come to the right place.

This article presents a complete guide that takes you through the following:

Ready to dive in? Let's go!

What is Blended Learning in the Classroom?

A formal definition of blended learning that was introduced by Garrison and Kanuka (2004), explains that:

In informal language, blended learning is an education program that combines two learning approaches - the traditional classroom learning and the elearning approach.

This 'blend' in the way learning is provided, is currently taking place in the classroom, mostly in high schools, colleges and universities.

The emergence of digital technology in the 21st century and the customary use of smartphones, laptops and tablets in every aspect of everyday life, has slowly introduced this type of learning within the core structure of Higher Education.

The aim for its use is to make learning easier and more effective delivering an integrated learning experience that offers real value to learners and matches their needs.

What Are the Characteristics of Blended Learning?

When talking about blended learning, an important distinction that needs to be made is that blended learning is not simply a tech-rich instruction or a standalone online course.

In ' Blended: Using Disruptive Innovation to Improve Schools ' (2015), Michael Horn and Heather Staker explain that a blended learning program is delivered:

a) Part online - online learning with some element of student control and flexibility over the way they learn including the time, place, pace and the path they take.

b) Part away from home - in part or in combination of a brick and mortar location away from home (instruction at a physical classroom/school or on-campus).

c) Through a learning path - a personalized learning path that offers students the opportunity to learn through activities that capitalize on different learning modalities.

According to BlendedLearning.org, the key thing to remember here is 'student control':

'The technology used for the online learning must shift content and instruction to the control of the student in at least some way for it to qualify as blended learning from the student's perspective, rather than just the use of digital tools from the classroom teacher's perspective.'

In essence it doesn't define the type of technology learners use but how they are using it and the degree of control they have over it.

This gives learners the ability to pause, go back, or skip forward through online content but also the opportunity to choose the time, the path and the location at which they can learn a new concept, complete coursework or assessments e.g. assignment or exam.

What Are the Benefits of Blended Learning?

When properly implemented, blended courses can come with a range of advantages for both teachers (or instructors) and learners:

Benefit #1: Flexibility

For teachers, there is more flexibility in terms of how they can deliver synchronous or asynchronous online instruction and present learning resources. At the same time, learners can learn at their own pace, and choose which learning styles suits them the most.

Benefit #2: Effectiveness

Research shows that blended learning has the proven potential to enhance both the effectiveness and the efficiency of meaningful learning experiences. Interaction capabilities between instructors and learners using email, discussion boards or chat rooms can enhance student engagement and allow space for collaborative learning.

Benefit #3: Personalization

In a blended learning environment, instructors have greater insights into a learner's progress and can easily identify learning gaps with the help of online learning tools. This leads to creating learning experiences and adopting learning methods that respond better to their personal needs and interests.

Benefit #4: Greater reach

Face to face instruction is significantly decreased when following a blended learning approach. Usually 30 to 70 percent of the learning is administered online which gives teachers the opportunity to expand their reach and the amount of students they can take under their wing.

Benefit #5: Reduced cost

What's great about blended learning is that most of the associated costs that educational institutions or organizations are faced with are reduced. From traveling costs, to renting big venues for events, and printing out learning materials, there is lots of money educational organizations and schools can save with digital learning.

What Are the Four Models of Blended Learning?

Blending learning comes in many forms as it can be personalized to each individual. If you are interested in blended learning, these are the most popular blended learning models you need to become familiar with:

Let's discuss each one in more detail:

Model #1: Rotation

In the rotation model, students rotate on a fixed schedule or as the teacher advises, between learning modalities of which at least one of them is online learning. Other modalities include face-to-face instruction - working in a small group or full-class, through group work/projects, 1:1 tutoring, and pencil-and-paper assignments. Students mostly learn attending the brick and mortar school.

As the graph above shows, the rotation model has four different subcategories that are worth exploring further.

Station Rotation:

Most commonly used in elementary schools, the station rotation model allows students to rotate through stations within a classroom as members of a group.

Lab Rotation:

This model requires students to rotate to a computer lab for the online-learning station. It offers flexible scheduling arrangements with teachers and paraprofessionals.

Individual Rotation:

It allows students to rotate through stations but only on the stations that are set by the teacher or software algorithm. Students don't need to rotate to every station but only to the individual activities that are scheduled on their playlists.

Flipped Classroom:

This model 'flips' the traditional role of each learning space. Students get to learn from home through online coursework and watching lectures and they engage in group exercise, projects and discussions with the guided support of the teacher.

The flipped classroom is favourite amongst teachers and students and it looks like it's going to be the future of education. This is because it makes use of the two ends of the spectrum - online and offline learning, effectively.

Model #2: Flex

The flex model allows students to have more control over their learning. Most learning happens online but there are instances where additional face-to-face support and class time instruction is needed. Students learn as part of a fluid schedule that is customized to each individual.

Model #3: A La Carte

The A La Carte model - most popular in high schools, offers students the flexibility to take an online course with an online teacher of record, that complements learning experiences of face-to-face courses at a brick-and-mortar school.

Model #4: Enriched Virtual

The enriched virtual model allows students to complete the majority of their coursework online but also attend school for face-to-face learning sessions. This model doesn't require daily school attendance like the flipped classroom but it's not a fully online course either because some kind of attendance e.g. twice a week, is required.

All of these blending learning models have a common goal. That is to move from a teacher-centered to a more learner-centered approach, improving student success.

Edutopia explains how this is possible through blended learning:

How Can You Offer Blended Learning?

Perhaps the biggest consideration when it comes to using blended learning is that it is hugely based on technology. For teachers and students who aren't tech-savvy, this can be a challenge because it forces them to learn how to use it.

This means that your learning center, school or organization needs to use digital tools that are:

Choosing the right technology that checks all of these three points is critical to any successful education program.

Any technical issues occurring from a learning software that is not accustomed to the elearning standards, won't bring the results you expect either.

To be able to offer blended learning, you will need an LMS - a Learning Management System or a learning platform that offers an impactful solution.

Our very own platform at LearnWorlds, comes with a powerful set of features that can help you deliver blended learning effectively.

Make use of the Interactive Video

Interactivity is important when talking about digital learning since it helps to improve student retention and motivation.

With LearnWorlds you can deliver unique learning experiences using the interactive video. The Interactive Video allows you to add questions in the flow of the video, giving learners the opportunity to click on it to answer questions.

Apart from that, it also comes with interactive subtitles and transcripts which aims to make it easier for teachers to teach students of any level.

With the Interactive Video Transcripts you can do all the following:

Auto-create your video transcript

Present the whole narrated text to the learners

Highlight in real-time the spoken words

Enable learners to navigate to the video by clicking on the transcript text

For more information on the Interactive Video visit our relevant article.

Learn through a customizable Course Player

Use LearnWorlds' course player to deliver your online course and simplify the learning process for your students.
The course player offers the possibility to create a learning path for each learner or group of learners. As a teacher, you can select whether they will navigate freely, sequentially or even set your own restrictions.

With drip feeding, you can also control which content or learning materials your students can have access to and when.

Last but not least, it offers the ability for learners to take notes or highlight key terms and ideas while they read through the text.

Create learning activities to test knowledge

In terms of learning, you can create a variety of tests and quizzes to assess the knowledge of your students.

From informal quizzes that evaluate self improvement to formal tests, questionnaires and assignments relating to critical thinking and the attainment of skills, the choices are endless.

Upon the completion of the education program or online course, you can also offer a certificate as evidence of participation and success.

Build a thriving online community

With the LearnWorlds platform you get to build an inclusive learning environment where learners can easily interact with and learn from each other.

This is possible through the community page that you can find in your school's dashboard as a LearnWorlds user.

As part of the community, learners can create their own profiles, comment, like or follow other classmates.

They can also reach out to others individually or a part of a group through course discussion groups. For more information on the community page, visit our Community and Groups support article.

Looking for an LMS to Apply Blended Learning?

Traditional face to face learning is very different from elearning but when these two approaches are combined, they are super powerful. Blended learning is here to stay, and as we move forward into the digital age, more schools will be investing in it.

If you are an educator who wants to build an online school that complements classroom instruction, you will need a reliable LMS or an online learning platform like LearnWorlds.

LearnWorlds comes with all the features you can find in any LMS (and many more) and can help you create unique and unforgettable learning experiences.

Start your free 30-day trial with LearnWorlds today and see for yourself!
References: Blended Learning Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. Internet and Higher Education, 7, 95-105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001. Christensen Institute "Blended: Using Disruptive Innovation to Improve Schools," by Michael Horn and Heather Staker Raise Your Hand Texas
(Visited 1,417 times, 17 visits today)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Blended Learning: What It Is, Why It Matters & How to Apply

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Blended learning is an educational approach that combines both traditional ways of teaching (e.g., inside the classroom) and online ways of teaching, through a series of online educational materials and interactive activities. If you are an educator interested in getting to know more about blended learning, you have come to the right place.

# data[].attributes.headline
5 Easy Ways To Use Blended Learning In Your Classroom

# data[].attributes.subject
5 Easy Ways To Use Blended Learning In Your Classroom

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
You might be an educator if you're familiar with these terms: "edtech," " flipped classrooms," "formative assessments," "blended learning" - the education world is full of technology-related jargon these days.

With new technology innovations bursting on the scene regularly, it can be hard to keep up and figure out how to personally harness some of these new ideas. Today, let's take a closer look at just one of those terms: blended learning.

Many professionals and highly respected individuals in the education field agree that blended learning benefits more than just educators. A report by fueleducation states the following:
"These blended learning programs have resulted in greater productivity for teachers and better outcomes for students because students receive the attention, support, and resources they need - and teachers can spend more time differentiating instruction."
Defining "blended learning"

Let's step back a moment though, because I am sure you're familiar with the previous statement, and define blended learning.

What exactly is blended learning? Blended learning takes technology and traditional learning and... blends them together.

That seems pretty self-explanatory, and understanding why it is successful in the classroom is not a mystery. As technology evolves, it augments traditional learning. The more mysterious question is how to implement blended learning in your traditional classroom.

Implementing blended learning in your classroom

Blended learning doesn't have to be overwhelming. It can't be, because educators already have a busy, demanding schedule. Since technology is not leaving the classroom (at least for the present), let us help you embrace it.

Here are five simple ways you can start implementing blended learning in your classroom today even if you have little knowledge about new technology.
#1 - Use what you already have.
How long have you been teaching? Two years? Five years? More than ten? Even if you just recently started teaching, you have already created and perfected lesson plans, probably in a traditional teaching style. Keep them. Do not waste your valued time reinventing all your lesson plans to work with technology.

Instead, sit down with your lesson plans and think about how you can teach part of your lesson plans with technology. Could you add a short video you found on the web that relates to the lesson's theme? Having students watch a short video in class is a great way to break up a long traditional lecture.
#2 - Turn on the cell phones.
You probably have an anti-cell phone school policy, and there might be three or four signs hanging in your classroom right now that say NO CELLPHONES. Well, today is the day you throw those signs away.

Although cellphones have the potential for distraction, they are also a piece of technology we all know how to use (and students WANT to use) and one that you can easily incorporate into your classroom. Odds are more than 80% of your students have a cell phone.

Break from your lesson for a brainstorming session. Instruct your students to log into their twitter accounts (although at this point they may think you have lost it). Tell them to tweet content relating to today's lesson with a hashtag so you can keep track of who participated. (Example: something simple like #history4322)
#3 - Send interesting work home.
The school bell rang in the middle of your discussion and you wish you had just a few more minutes. Now you do. Assign a video to watch or a set of questions to do online prior to the next class session. (Tip: check first to see if all of your students have internet access outside of school.)

You can send students the video link or worksheet in an email or Ving, and then your students can be prepped and ready for the class discussion. For example, send a message to your students with the link to an online documentary. Thanks to technology, you can now augment your lessons with additional educational info.
#4 - Create some in-class group work.
Learning to collaborate is a key life skill. Many business teams collaborate on a daily basis and working together effectively is key. You can teach this skill in your class with everything from homework assignments to huge projects. For example, Google Docs works just like Word, and the best part of Docs is that you can view and edit others' work simultaneously.

This means that whether your students are in class or at home, everyone can stay involved. Try using Docs with a small assignment at first. Have all your students jump on a device and open a document you shared with them. Give them a question and allow them all to respond to the question on the shared Doc.

The result: students will be able to see how easily their work can be shared, and both you and your students will be ready for their next big project.
#5 - Organize some online study sessions.
During my middle school days, I remember having study sessions before a big exam. We would always play Jeopardy. My teachers would cover the chalkboard in construction paper that had a dollar amount on one side and the question on the back. We divided into teams, and one person would go up to the board at a time.

What if you could eliminate the construction board, some prep time, and the slow one-answer-at-a-time system? What if everyone could answer every question and all have the same time prepping for the test?

Now they can. With a program like Kahoot, every student can be involved right from their mobile device. Break out those cell phones again, and let every student review every question for tomorrow's test.

Getting started with these tips

Implementing blended learning may seem like a lot, but don't let it overwhelm you. Try one suggestion a week. Make the transition to blended learning a fun and exciting one for both you and your students.
Today's blog post by Karen Bell, Ving Success Representative

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
5 Easy Ways To Use Blended Learning In Your Classroom

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
You might be an educator if you're familiar with these terms: "edtech," " flipped classrooms," "formative assessments," "blended learning" - the education world is full of technology-related jargon these days. With new technology innovations bursting on the scene regularly, it can be hard to keep up and figure out how to personally harness some of these new ideas.

# data[].attributes.headline
APPLICATION OF THE BLENDED LEARNING METHOD AS AN EFFORT TO SOLVE MATHEMATICS LEARNING PROBLEMS IN THE COVID-19 PLAGUE

# data[].attributes.subject
APPLICATION OF THE BLENDED LEARNING METHOD AS AN EFFORT TO SOLVE MATHEMATICS LEARNING PROBLEMS IN THE COVID-19 PLAGUE

# data[].attributes.headline
The Blended Learning Approach and Its Application in Language Teaching 

# data[].attributes.subject
The Blended Learning Approach and Its Application in Language Teaching 

# data[].attributes.headline
Analyzing Applications and Problems of Blended Learning(BL) for Agricultural Students

# data[].attributes.subject
Analyzing Applications and Problems of Blended Learning(BL) for Agricultural Students

# data[].attributes.headline
The impact of blended and traditional instruction in students’ performance

# data[].attributes.subject
The impact of blended and traditional instruction in students’ performance

# data[].attributes.headline
Blended Learning and Sense of Community: A comparative analysis with traditional and fully online graduate courses

# data[].attributes.subject
Blended Learning and Sense of Community: A comparative analysis with traditional and fully online graduate courses

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Blended Learning and Sense of Community: A Comparative Analysis with Traditional and Fully Online Graduate Courses | Rovai | The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Blended Learning and Sense of Community: A Comparative Analysis with Traditional and Fully Online Graduate Courses

# data[].attributes.headline
Mah Hang Soon: Apply 'blended learning' approach to handle Internet connectivity issues

# data[].attributes.subject
Mah Hang Soon: Apply 'blended learning' approach to handle Internet connectivity issues

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Mah Hang Soon: Apply 'blended learning' approach to handle Internet connectivity issues

# data[].attributes.headline
Apa dan Bagaimana Blended Learning dijalankan?

# data[].attributes.subject
Apa dan Bagaimana Blended Learning dijalankan?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Apa dan Bagaimana Blended Learning dijalankan?

# data[].attributes.headline
What is Blended Learning | Blended Learning Models | Advantages & Disadvantages | Hybrid Learning

# data[].attributes.subject
What is Blended Learning | Blended Learning Models | Advantages & Disadvantages | Hybrid Learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What is Blended Learning | Blended Learning Models | Advantages & Disadvantages | Hybrid Learning

# data[].attributes.headline
What Blended Learning Looks Like in the Classroom

# data[].attributes.subject
What Blended Learning Looks Like in the Classroom

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What Blended Learning Looks Like in the Classroom

# data[].attributes.headline
ADVANTAGES OF BLENDED LEARNING AMONG STUDENTS

# data[].attributes.subject
ADVANTAGES OF BLENDED LEARNING AMONG STUDENTS

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Find quizzes on any topic and practice or compete with friends.

# data[].attributes.headline
Blended Learning Strategies - Quiz & Worksheet

# data[].attributes.subject
Blended Learning Strategies - Quiz & Worksheet

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A comprehensive database of blended learning quizzes online, test your knowledge with blended learning quiz questions. Our online blended learning trivia quizzes can be adapted to suit your requirements for taking some of the top blended learning quizzes.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Join an activity with your class and find or create your own quizzes and flashcards.

# data[].attributes.body
surendran@uum.edu.my

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Please submit feedback regarding the course you have just completed, including feedback on course structure, and content.

# data[].attributes.body
1.Aiman Bin Azmi

2.Un Hock Haou

3.Muhammad syamim