research paper about blended learning

• Research article
• Open access
• Published: 06 February 2017

Blended learning effectiveness: the relationship between student characteristics, design features and outcomes

• Mugenyi Justice Kintu   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-4500-1168 1 , 2 ,
• Chang Zhu 2 &
• Edmond Kagambe 1  

International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education volume  14 , Article number:  7 ( 2017 ) Cite this article

752k Accesses

219 Citations

37 Altmetric

Metrics details

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

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

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

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.

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.

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%).

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).

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.

Abubakar, D. & Adetimirin. (2015). Influence of computer literacy on post-graduates’ use of e-resources in Nigerian University Libraries. Library Philosophy and Practice. From http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/ . Retrieved 18 Aug 2015.

Ahmad, N., & Al-Khanjari, Z. (2011). Effect of Moodle on learning: An Oman perception. International Journal of Digital Information and Wireless Communications (IJDIWC), 1 (4), 746–752.

Google Scholar  

Anderson, T. (2004). Theory and Practice of Online Learning . Canada: AU Press, Athabasca University.

Arbaugh, J. B. (2000). How classroom environment and student engagement affect learning in internet-basedMBAcourses. Business Communication Quarterly, 63 (4), 9–18.

Article   Google Scholar  

Askar, P. & Altun, A. (2008). Learner satisfaction on blended learning. E-Leader Krakow , 2008.

Astleitner, H. (2000) Dropout and distance education. A review of motivational and emotional strategies to reduce dropout in web-based distance education. In Neuwe Medien in Unterricht, Aus-und Weiterbildung Waxmann Munster, New York.

Barnard, L., Lan, W. Y., To, Y. M., Paton, V. O., & Lai, S. (2009). Measuring self regulation in online and blended learning environments’. Internet and Higher Education, 12 (1), 1–6.

Beard, L. A., Harper, C., & Riley, G. (2004). Online versus on-campus instruction: student attitudes & perceptions. TechTrends, 48 (6), 29–31.

Berenson, R., Boyles, G., & Weaver, A. (2008). Emotional intelligence as a predictor for success in online learning. International Review of Research in open & Distance Learning, 9 (2), 1–16.

Blocker, J. M., & Tucker, G. (2001). Using constructivist principles in designing and integrating online collaborative interactions. In F. Fuller & R. McBride (Eds.), Distance education. Proceedings of the Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 32–36). ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 457 822.

Cohen, K. E., Stage, F. K., Hammack, F. M., & Marcus, A. (2012). Persistence of master’s students in the United States: Developing and testing of a conceptual model . USA: PhD Dissertation, New York University.

Coldwell, J., Craig, A., Paterson, T., & Mustard, J. (2008). Online students: Relationships between participation, demographics and academic performance. The Electronic Journal of e-learning, 6 (1), 19–30.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1982). Intrinsic Motivation Inventory. Available from selfdeterminationtheory.org/intrinsic-motivation-inventory/ . Accessed 2 Aug 2016.

Delone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (2003). The Delone and McLean model of information systems success: A Ten-year update. Journal of Management Information Systems, 19 (4), 9–30.

Demirkol, M., & Kazu, I. Y. (2014). Effect of blended environment model on high school students’ academic achievement. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 13 (1), 78–87.

Eom, S., Wen, H., & Ashill, N. (2006). The determinants of students’ perceived learning outcomes and satisfaction in university online education: an empirical investigation’. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 4 (2), 215–235.

Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. Internet and Higher Education, 7 (2), 95–105.

Goyal, E., & Tambe, S. (2015). Effectiveness of Moodle-enabled blended learning in private Indian Business School teaching NICHE programs. The Online Journal of New Horizons in Education, 5 (2), 14–22.

Green, J., Nelson, G., Martin, A. J., & Marsh, H. (2006). The causal ordering of self-concept and academic motivation and its effect on academic achievement. International Education Journal, 7 (4), 534–546.

Guskey, T. R. (2000). Evaluating Professional Development . Thousands Oaks: Corwin Press.

Hadad, W. (2007). ICT-in-education toolkit reference handbook . InfoDev. from http://www.infodev.org/en/Publication.301.html . Retrieved 04 Aug 2015.

Hara, N. & Kling, R. (2001). Student distress in web-based distance education. Educause Quarterly. 3 (2001).

Heinich, R., Molenda, M., Russell, J. D., & Smaldino, S. E. (2001). Instructional Media and Technologies for Learning (7th ed.). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

Hofmann, J. (2014). Solutions to the top 10 challenges of blended learning. Top 10 challenges of blended learning. Available on cedma-europe.org .

Islam, A. K. M. N. (2014). Sources of satisfaction and dissatisfaction with a learning management system in post-adoption stage: A critical incident technique approach. Computers in Human Behaviour, 30 , 249–261.

Kelley, D. H. & Gorham, J. (2009) Effects of immediacy on recall of information. Communication Education, 37 (3), 198–207.

Kenney, J., & Newcombe, E. (2011). Adopting a blended learning approach: Challenges, encountered and lessons learned in an action research study. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 15 (1), 45–57.

Kintu, M. J., & Zhu, C. (2016). Student characteristics and learning outcomes in a blended learning environment intervention in a Ugandan University. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 14 (3), 181–195.

Kuo, Y., Walker, A. E., Belland, B. R., & Schroder, L. E. E. (2013). A predictive study of student satisfaction in online education programs. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 14 (1), 16–39.

Kwak, D. W., Menezes, F. M., & Sherwood, C. (2013). Assessing the impact of blended learning on student performance. Educational Technology & Society, 15 (1), 127–136.

Lim, D. H., & Kim, H. J. (2003). Motivation and learner characteristics affecting online learning and learning application. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 31 (4), 423–439.

Lim, D. H., & Morris, M. L. (2009). Learner and instructional factors influencing learner outcomes within a blended learning environment. Educational Technology & Society, 12 (4), 282–293.

Lin, B., & Vassar, J. A. (2009). Determinants for success in online learning communities. International Journal of Web-based Communities, 5 (3), 340–350.

Loukis, E., Georgiou, S. & Pazalo, K. (2007). A value flow model for the evaluation of an e-learning service. ECIS, 2007 Proceedings, paper 175.

Lynch, R., & Dembo, M. (2004). The relationship between self regulation and online learning in a blended learning context. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 5 (2), 1–16.

Marriot, N., Marriot, P., & Selwyn. (2004). Accounting undergraduates’ changing use of ICT and their views on using the internet in higher education-A Research note. Accounting Education, 13 (4), 117–130.

Menager-Beeley, R. (2004). Web-based distance learning in a community college: The influence of task values on task choice, retention and commitment. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California). Dissertation Abstracts International, 64 (9-A), 3191.

Naaj, M. A., Nachouki, M., & Ankit, A. (2012). Evaluating student satisfaction with blended learning in a gender-segregated environment. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 11 , 185–200.

Nurmela, K., Palonen, T., Lehtinen, E. & Hakkarainen, K. (2003). Developing tools for analysing CSCL process. In Wasson, B. Ludvigsen, S. & Hoppe, V. (eds), Designing for change in networked learning environments (pp 333–342). Dordrecht, The Netherlands, Kluwer.

Osgerby, J. (2013). Students’ perceptions of the introduction of a blended learning environment: An exploratory case study. Accounting Education, 22 (1), 85–99.

Oxford Group, (2013). Blended learning-current use, challenges and best practices. From http://www.kineo.com/m/0/blended-learning-report-202013.pdf . Accessed on 17 Mar 2016.

Packham, G., Jones, P., Miller, C., & Thomas, B. (2004). E-learning and retention key factors influencing student withdrawal. Education and Training, 46 (6–7), 335–342.

Pallant, J. (2010). SPSS Survival Mannual (4th ed.). Maidenhead: OUP McGraw-Hill.

Park, J.-H., & Choi, H. J. (2009). Factors influencing adult learners’ decision to drop out or persist in online learning. Educational Technology & Society, 12 (4), 207–217.

Picciano, A., & Seaman, J. (2007). K-12 online learning: A survey of U.S. school district administrators . New York, USA: Sloan-C.

Piccoli, G., Ahmad, R., & Ives, B. (2001). Web-based virtual learning environments: a research framework and a preliminary assessment of effectiveness in basic IT skill training. MIS Quarterly, 25 (4), 401–426.

Pituch, K. A., & Lee, Y. K. (2006). The influence of system characteristics on e-learning use. Computers & Education, 47 (2), 222–244.

Rahman, S. et al, (2011). Knowledge construction process in online learning. Middle East Journal of Scientific Research, 8 (2), 488–492.

Rovai, A. P. (2003). In search of higher persistence rates in distance education online programs. Computers & Education, 6 (1), 1–16.

Sankaran, S., & Bui, T. (2001). Impact of learning strategies and motivation on performance: A study in Web-based instruction. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 28 (3), 191–198.

Selim, H. M. (2007). Critical success factors for e-learning acceptance: Confirmatory factor models. Computers & Education, 49 (2), 396–413.

Shraim, K., & Khlaif, Z. N. (2010). An e-learning approach to secondary education in Palestine: opportunities and challenges. Information Technology for Development, 16 (3), 159–173.

Shrain, K. (2012). Moving towards e-learning paradigm: Readiness of higher education instructors in Palestine. International Journal on E-Learning, 11 (4), 441–463.

Song, L., Singleton, E. S., Hill, J. R., & Koh, M. H. (2004). Improving online learning: student perceptions of useful and challenging characteristics’. Internet and Higher Education, 7 (1), 59–70.

Stacey, E., & Gerbic, P. (2007). Teaching for blended learning: research perspectives from on-campus and distance students. Education and Information Technologies, 12 , 165–174.

Swan, K. (2001). Virtual interactivity: design factors affecting student satisfaction and perceived learning in asynchronous online courses. Distance Education, 22 (2), 306–331.

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Thompson, E. (2004). Distance education drop-out: What can we do? In R. Pospisil & L. Willcoxson (Eds.), Learning Through Teaching (Proceedings of the 6th Annual Teaching Learning Forum, pp. 324–332). Perth, Australia: Murdoch University.

Tselios, N., Daskalakis, S., & Papadopoulou, M. (2011). Assessing the acceptance of a blended learning university course. Educational Technology & Society, 14 (2), 224–235.

Willging, P. A., & Johnson, S. D. (2009). Factors that influence students’ decision to drop-out of online courses. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 13 (3), 115–127.

Zhu, C. (2012). Student satisfaction, performance and knowledge construction in online collaborative learning. Educational Technology & Society, 15 (1), 127–137.

Zielinski, D. (2000). Can you keep learners online? Training, 37 (3), 64–75.

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.

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

Mugenyi Justice Kintu & Edmond Kagambe

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

Mugenyi Justice Kintu & Chang Zhu

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

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 : 13 July 2016

Accepted : 23 November 2016

Published : 06 February 2017

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

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Blended learning effectiveness
• Learner characteristics
• Design features
• Learning outcomes and significant predictors

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Psychol Res Behav Manag

A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews on Blended Learning: Trends, Gaps and Future Directions

Muhammad azeem ashraf.

1 Research Institute of Education Science, Hunan University, Changsha, People’s Republic of China

Meijia Yang

Yufeng zhang, mouna denden.

2 Research Laboratory of Technologies of Information and Communication & Electrical Engineering (LaTICE), Tunis Higher School of Engineering (ENSIT), Tunis, Tunisia

Ahmed Tlili

3 Smart Learning Institute, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, People’s Republic of China

4 School of Professional Studies, Columbia University, New York City, NY, USA

Ronghuai Huang

Daniel burgos.

5 Research Institute for Innovation & Technology in Education (UNIR iTED), Universidad Internacional de La Rioja (UNIR), Logroño, 26006, Spain

Blended Learning (BL) is one of the most used methods in education to promote active learning and enhance students’ learning outcomes. Although BL has existed for over a decade, there are still several challenges associated with it. For instance, the teachers’ and students’ individual differences, such as their behaviors and attitudes, might impact their adoption of BL. These challenges are further exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, as schools and universities had to combine both online and offline courses to keep up with health regulations. This study conducts a systematic review of systematic reviews on BL, based on PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, to identify BL trends, gaps and future directions. The obtained findings highlight that BL was mostly investigated in higher education and targeted students in the first place. Additionally, most of the BL research is coming from developed countries, calling for cross-collaborations to facilitate BL adoption in developing countries in particular. Furthermore, a lack of ICT skills and infrastructure are the most encountered challenges by teachers, students and institutions. The findings of this study can create a roadmap to facilitate the adoption of BL. The findings of this study could facilitate the design and adoption of BL which is one of the possible solutions to face major health challenges, such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

Introduction

Blended Learning (BL) is one of the most frequently used approaches related to the application of Information and Communications Technology (ICT) in education. 1 In its simplest definition, BL aims to combine face-to-face (F2F) and online settings, resulting in better learning engagement and flexible learning experiences, with rich settings way further the use of a simple online content repository to support the face-to-face classes. 2 , 3 Researchers and practitioners have used different terms to refer to the blended learning approach, including “brick and click” instruction, 4 hybrid learning, 4 dual-mode instruction, 5 blended pedagogies, 4 HyFlex learning, 6 targeted learning, 4 multimodal learning and flipped learning. 3

Researchers and practitioners have pointed out that designing BL experiences could be complex, as several features need to be considered, including the quality of learning experiences, learning instruction, learning technologies/tools and applied pedagogies. 7–9 Therefore, they have focused on investigating different BL perspectives since 2000. 10 Despite this 21-year investigation and research, there are still several challenges and unanswered questions related to BL, including the quality of the designed learning materials 9 , 11 , 12 applied learning instructions, 9 the culture of resisting this approach, 13 , 14 and teachers being overloaded when applying BL. 15 The COVID-19 pandemic has further highlighted the challenges associated with BL. Specifically, international universities and schools worldwide had to take several actions with respect to health regulations, such as reducing classroom sizes. 16 Therefore, they combined online and offline learning to maintain their courses for both on-campus and off-campus experiences. 16 For instance, as a response to the effort made by the government of Indonesia to carry out physical distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic, in all domains including education, some elementary schools used BL with Moodle platform to ensure the continuity of learning. 17 In this context, several teachers raised concerns about implementing BL experiences, such as the lack of infrastructure and competencies to do so, calling for further investigation in this regard. Several international organizations, such as UNESCO and ILO, claimed that teacher professional development for online and blended learning is one of the priorities for building resilient education systems for the future. 18

Based on the background above, it is seen that there is still room for discussion of designing and implementing effective BL. Researchers have suggested that conducting literature reviews can help identify challenges and solutions in a given domain. 19–21 Review papers may serve the development of new theories and also shape future research studies, as well as disseminate knowledge to promote scientific discussion and reflection about concepts, methods and practices. However, several BL systematic reviews were conducted in the literature which are of variable quality, focus and geographical region. This made the BL literature fragmented, where no study provides a comprehensive summary that could be a reference for different stakeholders to adopt BL. In this context, Smith et al mentioned that a logical and appropriate next step is to conduct a systematic review of reviews of the topic under consideration, allowing the findings of separate reviews to be compared and contrasted, thereby providing comprehensive and in-depth findings for different stakeholders. 22 As BL is becoming the new normal, 23 this study takes a step further beyond simply conducting a systematic review and conducts a systematic review of systematic reviews on BL. By systematically examining high-quality published literature review articles, this study reveals the reported BL trends and challenges, as well as research gaps and future paths. These findings could help different stakeholders (eg, policy makers, teachers, instructional designers, etc.) to facilitate the design and adoption of BL worldwide. Although several systematic reviews of literature reviews have been conducted in different fields, such as engineering, 24 healthcare 25 and tourism, 26 no one was conducted on blended learning, to the best of our knowledge. It should be noted that one study was conducted in this context, but it mainly focused on the transparency of the systematic reviews that were conducted 27 and was not about the BL field itself.

Guided by the technology-based learning model (see Figure 1 ), this study aims to answer the following six research questions:

Blended learning model.

RQ1. What are the trends of blended learning research in terms of: publication year, geographic region and publication venue?

RQ2. What are the covered subject areas in blended learning research?

RQ3. Who are the covered participants (stakeholders) in blended learning research?

RQ4. What are the most frequently used research methods (in systematic reviews) in blended learning research?

RQ5. How blended learning was designed in terms of the used learning models and technologies?

RQ6. What are the learning outcomes of blended learning, as well as the associated challenges?

The findings of this study could help to analyze the behaviors and attitudes of different stakeholders from different BL contexts, hence draw a comprehensive understanding of BL and its impact from different international perspectives. This can promote cross-country collaboration and more open BL design that more worldwide universities could be involved in. The findings could also facilitate the design (eg, in terms of the used learning models and technologies) and adoption of BL which is one of the possible solutions to face major health challenges, such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methodology

This study presents a systematic review of systematic review papers on BL. In particular, this review follows the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. 28 PRISMA provides a standard peer-accepted methodology that uses a guideline checklist, which was strictly followed for this study, to contribute to the quality assurance of the revision process and to ensure its replicability. A review protocol was developed, describing the search strategy and article selection criteria, quality assessment, data extraction and data analysis procedures.

Search Strategy and Selection Criteria

To deal with this topic, an extensive search for research articles was undertaken in the most common and highly valued electronic databases: Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar, 29 using the following search strings.

Search string: ((blending learning substring) AND (literature review substring))

Blended learning substring: “Blended learning” OR “blended education” OR “hybrid learning” OR “flipped classroom” OR “flipped learning” OR “inverted classroom” OR “mixed-mode instruction” OR “HyFlex learning”

Literature review substring: “Review” OR “Systematic review” OR “state-of-art” OR “state of the art” OR “state of art” OR “meta-analysis” OR “meta analytic study” OR “mapping stud*” OR “overview”

Databases were searched separately by two of the authors. After searching the relevant databases, the two authors independently analyzed the retrieved papers by titles and abstracts, and papers that clearly were not systematic reviews, such as empirical, descriptive and conceptual papers, were excluded. Then, the two authors independently performed an eligibility assessment by carefully screening the full texts of the remaining papers, based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria described in Table 1 . During this phase, disagreements between the authors were resolved by discussion or arbitration from a third author. Specifically, to provide high-quality papers, this study was restricted to papers published in journals.

Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

This research yielded a total of 972 articles. After removing duplicated papers, 816 papers remained. 672 papers were then removed based on the screening of titles and abstracts. The remaining 144 papers were considered and assessed as full texts. 85 of these papers did not pass the inclusion criteria. Thus, as a total number, 57 eligible research studies remained for inclusion in the systematic review. Figure 2 presents the study selection process as recommended by the PRISMA group. 28

Flowchart of the systematic review process.

Quality Assessment

For methodological quality evaluation, the AMSTAR assessment tool was used. AMSTAR is widely used as a valuable tool to evaluate the quality of systematic reviews conducted in any academic field. 30 It consists of 11 items that evaluate whether the review was guided by a protocol, whether there was duplicate study selection and data extraction, the comprehensiveness of the search, the inclusion of grey literature, the use of quality assessment, the appropriateness of data synthesis and the documentation of conflicts of interest. Specifically, two authors independently assessed the methodological quality of the included reviews using the AMSTAR checklist. Items were evaluated as “Yes” (meaning the item has been properly handled, 1 point), “No” (indicating the possibility that the item did not perform well, 0 points) or “Not applicable” (in the case of performance failure because the item was not applied, 0 points). Disagreements regarding the AMSTAR score were resolved by discussion or by a decision made by a third author.

Appendix 1 presents the results of the quality assessment of the 57 systematic reviews based on the AMSTAR tool. 19 were rated as being low quality (AMSTAR score 0–4), 30 as being moderate quality (score 5–8), and eight as being high quality (score 9–11). Specifically, no study has acknowledged the conflict of interest in both the systematic review and the included studies. Also, few studies provided the list of the included and excluded studies (3 out of 57), and reported the method used to combine the findings of the studies (13 out of 57). About half of the included studies assessed the scientific quality of the included studies (25 out of 57), but all the studies fulfilled at least one quality criterion.

Data Extraction

This study adapted the technology-based learning model, 31 which has been used in BL contexts, 32 , 33 as shown in Figure 1 . This model is based on six factors: subject area, learning models, participants, outcomes and issues, research methods and adopted technologies. The current study adopted most of the schemes from this model but made slight adjustments according to the features of different models in blended learning. Table 2 presents a detailed description of the coding scheme that was used in this study to answer the aforementioned research questions.

The Coding Scheme for Analyzing the Collected Papers

Results and Discussion

Blended learning trends.

Figure 3 shows that the first two systematic reviews on BL were conducted in 2012. The first, by Keengwe and Kang, 34 investigated the effectiveness of BL practices in the teacher education field. The second was by Rowe et al, 35 which investigated how to incorporate BL in clinical settings and health education. These findings show an early interest in providing teachers with the necessary competencies and skills to use BL, as well as in enhancing health education, where students need more practical knowledge and skills that could be facilitated through BL (eg, simulation health videos, virtual labs, etc.). The number of literature reviews conducted has since increased, showing an increased interest in BL over the years. Specifically, the highest peak of literature reviews conducted on blended learning was in 2020 (16 studies). This might be due to the COVID-19 pandemic, which forced most institutions worldwide to implement BL (online merged with offline) to accommodate the needs of learners in this disruptive time. 18 This has encouraged many institutions to make their own attempts to practice BL and thus furthered the research interest in examining the best practices of BL.

Distribution of studies by publication year.

Additionally, according to the authors’ affiliation countries (see Figure 4 ), China and the United States have the highest number of publications, with nine and seven studies respectively. This could be explained by the continuous rapid evolution of the technological education industry in both China and the United States, 36 which has made researchers and educators innovate to provide more flexible learning experiences by combining both online and offline environments. 37 This could also be explained by the number of blended learning policies that have been issued in these two countries to facilitate blended learning adoption. 38 , 39

Distribution of studies per country.

Interestingly, while several studies are from Europe (eg, Belgium, the UK, Italy, etc.), there are very few studies from the African and Arab regions. Similarly, in BL contexts, Birgili et al 40 conducted a systematic review about flipped learning between 2012 and 2018; they found very few studies coming from Africa. This indicates a trend where countries with more sufficient educational resources and infrastructure are exposed to more chances to develop BL environments and experiences. These findings call for more cross-country collaboration to facilitate the implementation of BL in the countries that have limited knowledge or infrastructure related to BL. For instance, such a collaboration could cover BL policies, ICT trainings and the development of educational resources and technologies.

Finally, the 57 reviews were published in 44 journals. Figure 5 shows the journals that have at least two publications. Education and Information Technologies has the highest number of publications (six studies), followed by Interactive Learning Environments (four studies) and Nurse Education Today (four studies). These journals are mostly from the educational technology and health fields.

Distribution of studies by publication venue.

Subject Area

Figure 6 shows that most of the literature review studies (n = 21) did not mention the covered subject area and discussed BL in general. For example, Wang et al proposed a complex adaptive systems framework to conduct analysis on BL literature. 41 This shows that, despite the popularity of BL, which has existed for a decade, educators and researchers are still finding it to be a complex concept that needs further investigation regardless of the subject. 2

Distribution of studies by subject area.

Other studies considered BL as being context-dependent, 42 investigating it from different subject areas, namely health (14 studies), STEM (five studies) and language (three studies). This could be explained by these three subjects requiring a lot of practical knowledge, such as communication and pronunciation, programming or physical treatments, where the BL concept could provide teachers with a chance to be more innovative and offer students the possibility of practicing this practical knowledge online by using virtual labs or online virtual programming emulators, for instance. Walker et al 43 and Yeonja et al 44 found that BL is considered to be crucial for health students, and health educators have tried to integrate a wide range of advanced technology and learning tools to enhance their skill acquisition.

From these findings, it can be deduced that more research should be conducted to investigate how BL is conducted in other subject areas that are considered crucial for student performance assessment, such as mathematics. This could help researchers and practitioners compare the different BL design and assessment approaches in different subjects and come up with personalized guidelines that could help educators implement their BL in a specific subject. In this context, studies have pointed out that teachers are willing to implement BL in their courses but do not know how. 45 Additionally, as shown in Figure 6 , most of the conducted literature reviews covered limited number of studies (less than 50). Therefore, the future literature reviews on BL should cover more studies (more than 50) to have an in-depth and broad view of how BL is being implemented in different contexts by different researchers.

Participants

As Figure 7A shows, the most targeted participants by the review studies were students (n = 42) followed by teachers (n = 13) and then working adults, health professionals and researchers (one study for each). This analysis shows that none of the review studies have targeted major players in the adoption of BL, such as policy makers. Owston stated that policies on different levels (eg, institutions, faculties, technology use, data collection procedures, learning support, etc.) are crucial to advancing the adoption of BL for future education. 38 Therefore, to advance BL adoption worldwide, more reviews about BL policies and the focus of these policies – including copyright, privacy and data protection, and others, 46 , 47 – should be investigated to develop a BL policy framework to which everyone could refer.

( A ) Distribution by educational level. ( B ) Distribution by participants.

Figure 7B , on the other hand, shows that most of the review studies (n = 33) focused mainly on higher education, followed by K–12 (six studies) and teacher education (five studies). Interestingly, these findings are in line with two older studies that were conducted in 2012 (Halverson et al) 48 and 2013 (Drysdale et al), 49 where they found that BL is mostly applied in higher education. These findings clearly show that, despite the long period of time since 2012, the research setting of BL application has not changed, which calls for more serious efforts and research about BL design in other contexts, such as K–12. Especially since younger students might lack the appropriate self-regulation skills compared to older students that can help them adopt BL, 50 more support should also be provided accordingly. Additionally, as few studies focused on teacher education, more research should investigate how to harness the power of BL for teacher professional development. There are limited empirical findings on BL for teacher professional development, 34 , 51–53 calling for more investigation in this context.

Research Method

Table 3 shows that most reviews conducted were systematic reviews (n = 47). As researchers note, systematic literature reviews are usually composed with a clearly defined objective, a research question, a research approach and inclusion and exclusion criteria. 54–56 Through systematic review, researchers can come to a qualitative conclusion in response to their research question. Only seven reviews conducted meta-analysis to assess the effect size and variability of BL and to identify potential causal factors that can inform practice and further research. Finally, three studies used both systematic reviews and meta-analysis in their studies, which can quantitatively synthesize the results in an even more comprehensive way. For instance, Liu et al 57 first reviewed the literature of the effectiveness of knowledge acquisition in health-subject learners and then conducted a meta-analysis to show that BL had a significant larger pooled effect size than non-BL health-subject learners. In this way, researchers are able to address the extent to which BL is truly effective in the learning. 57 Considering that only three review papers conducted both systematic review and meta-analysis, we must again address the usefulness of quantitative analysis. There are still many unanswered questions that could be addressed in a better way using quantitative analysis. Therefore, future research should consider conducting more meta-analysis in order to provide a better understanding of the nuanced effects of BL.

Distribution of Studies by Research Method and Subject Area

Design (Learning Models and Technologies)

Figure 8 shows that the majority of review studies (33 out of 57) discussed BL as a generic concept and did not mention any specific model. Additionally, the flipped model was the most frequently implemented model, mentioned by 27 review studies. This model is designed based on three stages: pre-class, in-class and post-class (optional). In the pre-class stage, the students engage with the course content through online resources, so that they spend in-class time doing practical activities and having discussions. Then, in the post-class stage, teachers can assess the students’ perceptions and performance in the flipped course. 32

Frequency of usage of blended learning models.

The second most frequently used models were the station rotation model and the flex model (each mentioned by three studies). In the station rotation model, the student can rotate at fixed points of time (on a fixed schedule or at the teacher’s discretion) between different stations, at least one of which is an online learning station). 58 For instance, the students can rotate between face-to-face (F2F) instruction, online instruction and collaborative activities. The flex model, on the other hand, relies entirely on online materials and student self-study, with the availability of F2F teachers when needed. 59

Two review studies mentioned the self-blend (also known as the “à la carte” model) and the enriched virtual model. The first model allows students to take fully online courses with online teachers, in addition to other F2F courses. 60 In the second model, students are asked to be able to conduct F2F sessions with instructors and then can complete their assignments online, but they are not required to attend F2F classes. 60

Finally, only one study applied the mixed model, supplemental model and online practicing model. Specifically, in the mixed model, content delivery and practical activities occur both F2F and online. In the supplemental model, both content delivery and practical activities take place F2F. In contrast, in the online practicing model, students can practice activities through a specific online learning environment. In particular, the reported BL models were implemented differently in many domains. It should be noted that some studies investigated more than one BL model. For instance, Alammary investigated flipped, mixed, flex, supplemental, and online-practicing models. 59

Table 4 presents the distribution of the reviewed studies by BL models and subject areas. 22 studies (seven multiple courses and 15 uncategorized) have focused on the design of BL in general or in multiple courses. This might be explained by the fact that teachers have limited knowledge about BL models that is why they always face challenges on how to design their blended courses and mix the offline and online settings. 58 This blended learning design problem was further emphasized during the COVID-19 pandemic, where several teachers raised concerns about this matter. 61 Therefore, more BL design trainings should be provided for teachers to help them efficiently design their blended courses.

Distribution of Studies by Blended Learning Models and Subject Area

Additionally, the flipped model was frequently used in health (seven studies), followed by STEM (five studies). This may be explained by health and STEM subjects requiring many hands-on practices to promote skill acquisition and long-term retention by the student. 62 , 63 In line with this, the flipped model enables teachers to reduce the in-class time by teaching all the courses online (in the pre-class stage) and counterbalance the students’ workload, so that the class time can be reserved for practical exercises instead of traditional lectures. For instance, in the health domain, the flipped model is applied by explaining the basic concepts of the course using different learning strategies in the pre-class stage, such as online learning platforms, instructional videos, animation, PowerPoint presentations and 3D virtual gaming situations. Also, students can use social media platforms such as Facebook for online discussions. In-class activities include instructor-led training, discussion of issues, practice or doing exercises (eg, assignments or quizzes), clinical teaching (eg, nursing diagnosis training) or lab teaching. In this context, several learning technologies were used, such as traditional computers and projectors, medical or teaching equipment and simulation teaching aids. Finally, in the post-class stage, some teachers used assessment methods to evaluate students’ perception of the applied model using peer evaluation, post-class evaluation and surveys. Similarly, in STEM subjects, the in-class time was reserved for more practice, including complex exercises where students can interact with each other and with the instructor (collaborative group assignments), active learning exercises rather than lectures, gaming activities, examinations and peer instruction.

Furthermore, as Table 4 shows, the mixed, flex, supplemental and online practicing models were also applied in STEM, specifically in programming courses. 59 This may be explained by the fact that STEM subjects – and programming courses in particular – allow for flexibility; combined with emerging technologies, this enables the teaching of this course in different ways, fully online or F2F. 64 For instance, in the mixed model, students received the course content and practical coding exercises in both F2F and online sessions, reserving most of the in-class time for practical exercises and discussion. In this context, in addition to the classical learning strategies such as online self-paced learning, online collaboration and online instructor-led learning, online programming tools were also used for coding and problem solving in online sessions. In the flex model, both course content and practical coding exercises take place online, but students are required to attend F2F sessions from time to time to check their progress or be provided with feedback. In the supplemental model, both course content and practical coding exercises take place F2F. However, online supplemental activities are added to the course to increase students’ engagement with course content. In the online practicing model, an online programming environment is used as the backbone of students’ learning. It allows students to practice programming and problem solving and provides them with immediate feedback about their programming solutions. The delivery of the course content is achieved through lectures and/or self-based online resources. In some cases, online resources are integrated within the online programming environment.

Outcomes and Challenges

Figure 9 presents the different learning outcomes investigated in the 57 review studies based on two categories: psychological and behavioural outcomes. 65 The majority of studies (49 studies) focused on investigating the psychological outcomes within the reviewed studies. Specifically, students’ self-regulation toward learning was the most investigated psychological outcome (10 studies), followed by satisfaction (nine studies) and engagement (eight studies). According to Van Laer and Elen, blended learning design includes attributes that support self-regulation, including authenticity, personalization, learner control, scaffolding and interaction. 66 The 10 studies found that students’ self-regulation was improved. Additionally, BL was found to improve students’ satisfaction and engagement in different domains, especially in health (seven studies). For instance, Li et al 67 and Presti 68 found that flipped learning enhanced students’ engagement and satisfaction in nursing education. Moreover, motivation, attitude, high-order thinking, social interaction and self-efficacy were found to be improved using BL.

Distribution of learning outcomes based on the number of studies addressing them.

The most investigated behavioural outcome is academic performance (26 studies), followed by skill progression and cooperation. In particular, the 26 studies showed that BL supports learning performance in different subject areas, including health, language and STEM. BL can also enhance students’ skills, such as clinical skills in the health domain, 35 , 69 and speaking skills in the language domain. 70 Additionally, its design may include several collaborative learning assignments (online or F2F) that encourage cooperation with students. 71 It should be noted that some studies investigated more than one type of learning outcomes. For instance, Atmacasoy and Aksu investigated students’ engagement with, collaboration in, participation in and academic performance with the blended learning course. 72

Despite the many advantages that BL offers, it also comes with several challenges. Figure 10 presents the most encountered challenges in the 57 review studies. Specifically, the lack of ICT skills is the most mentioned challenge (seven studies), followed by infrastructure issues (six studies) such as internet-related problems and lack of personal computers, course preparation time (three studies), design model and cost of technologies (two studies for each) and course quality content, student engagement and student isolation (one study for each). It should be noted that 47 studies did not mention any challenges and nine studies mentioned more than one challenge each. For instance, Rasheed et al found that students, teachers and institutions may face different challenges in BL, such as students’ isolation, lack of ICT skills for teachers and students and technological provision challenges (eg, cost of online learning technologies) for institutions. 73

Distribution of blended learning challenges.

Both teachers and students from different domains might lack ICT skills, which can negatively influence their adoption of BL. For instance, Atmacasoy and Aksu stated that teachers with low ICT skills may not have positive attitudes toward using BL since it is based on technology use. 72 Teachers might find difficulties in the ease of use of some technologies while creating a BL course, such as in recording videos, uploading videos and using online learning platforms. 73 Additionally, students may face some technological complexity challenges, such as accessing online educational resources or uploading their materials to the online learning environment. 73

ICT infrastructure is also a crucial layer for facilitating and implementing blended courses; however, it is still a major problem for several universities, especially in developing countries 74 and rural areas. 75 For instance, a lack of basic technologies, including internet, computers and projectors can limit the implementation of blended courses. Therefore, it is very important to improve institutes’ ICT infrastructure in order to improve education in general and enable teachers to teach using BL, which has proven to be efficient in many subject areas (see sections above).

In addition to issues with ICT skills and infrastructure, teachers may lack knowledge about designing BL models and hence face difficulties in selecting the appropriate design for their courses, 58 and they may also spend too much time preparing the blended course. 75 , 76 Moreover, some challenges of online learning, such as engagement and students’ isolation, may be faced in BL. In this context, teachers may integrate online collaborative assignments to solve the problem of isolation 77 and integrate new approaches, such as gamification, into the online learning environment in order to make students motivated and engaged while learning online. 78 , 79 In this context, Ekici found that gamified flipped learning enhanced students’ motivation and engagement while learning. 80

This study conducted a systematic review of systematic reviews on BL. It revealed several findings according to each research question: (1) the first two systematic reviews on BL were conducted in 2012, and this number rapidly increased over the years, reflecting a massive interest in BL. Additionally, more cross-country collaboration should be established to facilitate BL implementation in countries that lack, for instance, infrastructure or the needed BL competencies; (2) despite that several studies focused on specific subject area such as health or STEM, most studies did not discuss BL from a specific subject area; (3) most of the studies targeted students as stakeholders, and neglected major key players for BL adoption, such as policy makers; (4) most of the studies conducted a systematic review with qualitative analysis. Therefore, future research should follow a more quantitative approach through meta-analysis in order to provide a better understanding of the nuanced effects of BL; (5) the majority of studies discussed BL as a generic construct and did not focus on the learning models of BL. However, the flipped model was the most frequently implemented model in the papers that focused on learning models specifically in health and STEM ; and (6) BL can affect students’ psychological and behavioural outcomes. In terms of psychological outcomes, it can enhance students’ self-regulation toward learning, satisfaction and engagement while learning in different domains, especially in health. In terms of behavioural outcomes, BL supported students’ academic performance in different subject areas. Additionally, a lack of ICT skills and infrastructure are the most encountered challenges by teachers, students and institutions.

The findings of this study can help create a roadmap about future research on BL. This could facilitate BL adoption worldwide and thus contribute to achieving the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), especially SDG #4 – equity and high-quality education for all – which works as a backbone for some other SDGs, such as good health (#3), economic Growth (#8) and reduced inequality (#10). Despite the importance of the revealed findings, this study has several limitations that should be acknowledged. For instance, this study used a limited number of search keywords within specific electronic databases.

Future research might focus on: (1) dealing with these limitations; (2) investigating different BL models with specific application domains to test their impacts on students’ psychological and behavioural outcomes; (3) enhancing students’ motivation and engagement in online sessions by integrating new motivational concepts such as gamification in online learning platforms; and (4) dealing with BL challenges by providing some solutions to enhance the learning experience. For instance, for the challenge of a lack of ICT skills, research might work to provide ICT trainings for teachers and students to enhance their skills with technology.

Acknowledgments

The study was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (The Research Fund for International Young Scientists; Grant No. 71950410624). However, any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Natural Science Foundation of China.

The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

Search NYU Steinhardt

The Research Alliance for New York City Schools

Exploring the Evidence on Virtual and Blended Learning

Chelsea farley (2020).

The Research Alliance has developed an overview of research and practical guidance on strategies to implement remote teaching and learning, as well as strategies that combine virtual and in-class instruction. While not a complete summary of the relevant literature, our overview provides links to a variety of useful articles, resources, and reports. We hope this material can inform school and district leaders’ planning and support their ongoing assessment of what has and has not been effective, for whom, and under what conditions.

Key Takeaways from the Research Alliance’s Review

• Eight months into the COVID-19 pandemic, there is still an enormous need for data and evidence to understand how the school closures that took place in NYC and around the country—and how the various approaches to reopening—have affected students’ academic, social/emotional, and health outcomes. New research is needed to inform critical policy and practice decisions. (Below we highlight specific kinds of data that would help answer the most pressing questions.)
• Past research about online learning is limited and mostly focused on post-secondary and adult education. The studies that do exist in K-12 education find that students participating in online learning generally perform similarly to or worse than peers who have access to traditional face-to-face instruction (with programs that are 100% online faring worse than blended learning approaches). It is important to note that this research typically compares online learning with regular classroom instruction—rather than comparing it to no instruction at all—and that these studies took place under dramatically different conditions than those resulting from COVID-19.
• Studies of blended learning, personalized learning, and specific technology-based tools and programs provide hints about successful approaches, but also underscore substantial “fuzziness” around the definition of these terms; major challenges to high-quality implementation; and a lack of rigorous impact research.
• Teaching quality is more important than how lessons are delivered  (e.g., “clear explanations, scaffolding and feedback”);
• Ensuring access to technology is key , particularly for disadvantaged students and families;
• Peer interactions can provide motivation and improve learning outcomes  (e.g., “peer marking and feedback, sharing models of good work,” and opportunities for collaboration and live discussions of content);
• Supporting students to work independently can improve learning outcomes  (e.g., “prompting pupils to reflect on their work or to consider the strategies they will use if they get stuck”, checklists or daily plans); and
• Different approaches to remote learning suit different tasks and types of content.

Our overview highlights these and other lessons from dozens of relevant studies. It also underscores the need for more rigorous evidence about the implementation and impact of different approaches to remote and blended learning, particularly in the context of the current pandemic. To begin to fill these knowledge gaps,  the Research Alliance strongly encourages schools and districts—including the NYC Department of Education—to collect, analyze, and share data about :

• COVID-19 testing results,
• Professional development aimed at helping teachers implement remote and blended learning,
• Students’ attendance and engagement (online and in person),
• Students’ social and emotional wellbeing,
• Students’ and families’ experiences with remote and blended instruction,
• Teachers’ experiences with remote and blended instruction, and—critically—
• What students are learning, over time.

All of this should be done with an eye toward pre-existing inequalities—especially differences related to race/ethnicity, poverty, home language, and disability. These data are crucial for understanding how COVID-19 has affected the educational trajectories of different groups of students and for developing strong policy and practice responses. 

Read our full overview here . This document was initially released in May and updated in November of 2020.

Investigating blended learning interactions in Philippine schools through the community of inquiry framework

• Published: 16 February 2023

Cite this article

• Juliet Aleta R. Villanueva   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-1148-244X 1   na1 ,
• Petrea Redmond   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-9674-1206 2   na1 ,
• Linda Galligan   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8156-8690 3 &
• Douglas Eacersall   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-2674-1240 4  

21k Accesses

2 Citations

1 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

This article reports on an exploratory case study that applied the Community of Inquiry framework in the K-12 Philippine setting, where there are limited studies on blended learning interactions and experiences. The study examined blended learning interactions across three schools in the Philippine K-12 system to investigate the following: (1) what is the nature of interactions in the blended learning classes? and (2) how do the interactions indicate learning communities as outcomes of blended learning? A mixed method approach to data collection was undertaken, which included student surveys, focus group discussions, teacher interviews, and class observations. The constant comparative analysis uncovered thick descriptions of blended learning interactions. Findings uncovered three themes on blended learning across levels of interactions within the Community of Inquiry presences: (i) best of both worlds, (ii) learning anytime and anywhere, and (iii) learning with technology. Descriptive statistics indicated high mean ratings across the presences, revealing positive experiences afforded by the use of various technologies and social media. The study concluded that learning communities are an outcome of blended learning interactions. A Developmental Model for K-12 Blended Learning Communities was recommended to inform teacher professional development on pedagogies and practices supportive of learning community building in contexts where blended learning may continue to thrive.

Similar content being viewed by others

Exploring the role of social media in collaborative learning the new domain of learning

Jamal Abdul Nasir Ansari & Nawab Ali Khan

Innovative learning spaces: class management and universal design for learning

Irit Sasson, Itamar Yehuda & Shirley Miedijensky

Mapping research in student engagement and educational technology in higher education: a systematic evidence map

Melissa Bond, Katja Buntins, … Michael Kerres

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

Research into K-12 blended learning is a relatively young field. Scholarship in blended learning (BL) is dominated by the United States, with minimal reports from New Zealand, Canada, Australia, and South Africa (Barbour, 2018 ). Research in other contexts has been encouraged (Hu et al., 2019 ), and extensive studies should be undertaken on K-12 because of the mixed results on the benefits of BL (Poirier et al., 2019 ). Thus, this research focuses on the Philippines. Pre-pandemic, BL in the Philippines emerged under the Alternative Delivery Mode (ADM) to accommodate secondary-level students and adult learners (Villanueva, 2021 ). The observed growth coincided with the Department of Education’s shift from a 10-year primary and secondary education to a 12-year program, referred to as the K-12 Enhanced Basic Education program, which promotes quality education for all. This shift entailed implementing much-needed policies and reforms, including a commitment to invest in technology to improve access to quality education. The integration of information and communication technologies (ICT) in K-12 schools was anticipated to enable computerization programs, flexible learning options, and the use of educational technologies and online learning resources (Bonifacio, 2013 ). The key to the definition of BL is the extent of learner control and the personalization of learning it provides students, which distinguishes BL from technology-rich learning environments (Staker & Horn, 2014 ). Beyond studies that advocate for the successful implementation of BL programs is the challenge of bridging the divide among varied settings—contexts supportive of BL and contexts in which BL is emerging as a viable option. As such, this study aims to understand BL experiences in the context of Filipino students and their teachers and pursues two research questions: (1) what is the nature of interactions in blended learning classes? and (2) how do these indicate the learning communities are outcomes of BL?

By examining BL interactions, this study aims to present outcomes that bear implications for further research related to ICT integration and BL implementation in selected schools in the Philippines. The following section presents a brief literature review on BL; a description of the exploratory case study undertaken; and the results of this study, describing the nature of BL interactions through the Community of Inquiry framework (CoI) and emerging themes of this study. The remaining sections present the study's outcomes, including recommendations for future practice and research through a proposed Developmental Model of K-12 BL, highlighting learning community building.

Literature review

Learning communities and the coi framework.

Research into BL and online learning attested to the formation of learning communities wherein knowledge construction and social learning occur through interaction, collaboration, and personal accountability (Swan, 2002 ). A learning community may be described and understood as a set of interactions among community members to arrive at a common goal. Swan ( 2002 ) sought to extend the thinking along the lines of learning community building through interactivity discussed in Moore ( 1989 ), namely, interaction with content, interaction with instructors, and interaction with students. Swan ( 2003 ) outlined a practical way to appreciate the interrelatedness of these varied interactions (Fig.  1 ).

Interactivity and learning online by Swan ( 2003 ). Note. Adapted from “Learning effectiveness online: What the research tells us,” by K. Swan, in J. Bourne and J.C. Moore, Elements of quality online education, practice and direction (p. 17), 2003. Copyright 2003 by Sloan Center for Online Education . Reprinted with permission.

Key findings from these studies point to the value of interaction and harnessing opportunities among members of a learning community. In this instance, both teachers and learners were responsible for teaching, learning, and related social interactions. As such, the CoI has been associated with social constructivism, which claims that knowledge is constructed among members or participants of the learning community, in which interaction and collaboration are primarily mediated by communication and technology. The interplay of the three elements or presences was deemed necessary for a productive online learning community (Arbaugh et al., 2010 ). Cognitive presence (CP) is “the extent to which learners are able to construct and confirm meaning through sustained reflection and discourse in a critical community of inquiry” (Garrison et al., 2001 , p. 11). Social presence (SP) “is the ability of participants to identify with a group, communicate openly in a trusting environment, and develop personal and affective relationships progressively by way of projecting their individual personalities” (Garrison, 2017 , p. 25). Teaching presence (TP) is “the design, facilitation, and direction of cognitive and social processes for the purpose of realizing personally meaningful and educationally worthwhile learning outcomes” (Anderson et al., 2001 , p. 5). In the overlaps among the presences, specific aspects of the educational experience are addressed: setting the climate, selecting content, and supporting discourse to facilitate deep learning (Garrison et al., 2000 ; Swan & Ice, 2010 ).

However, a gap in the research is in the context of learning communities at the K-12 levels, which have increasingly adopted blended and online learning and flexible modes of delivery, particularly in non-Western contexts (Barbour & Reeves, 2009 ; Christensen et al., 2013 ). Despite sustained interest in the CoI, according to Befus ( 2016 ), few research endeavors have been completed in the context of K-12 teachers and students. This study aims to address this gap by focusing on the nature of BL interactions leading to the formation of learning communities.

BL models, benefits, and issues

In developed and industrialized countries, definitions and models of BL capture growing practices and acceptance at the higher education and K-12 levels. BL is the “thoughtful integration of classroom face-to-face learning experiences with online learning experiences” (Garrison & Kanuka, 2004 , p. 96). Often considered synonymous with hybrid learning, BL employs any combination of delivery methods, such as face-to-face instruction with synchronous or asynchronous modes, through the integration of technology tools for learning (Picciano et al., 2013 ). The number of models of K-12 BL programs is increasing with the advancement of technology and web 2.0 tools for learning. These models represent the extent to which the personalization of learning is afforded by the curriculum and how teachers tailor their teaching to increase academic engagement (Staker & Horn, 2014 ) while completing the learning modalities within a prescribed schedule or as allowed by the teacher (Halverson et al., 2017 ). Using these models, schools determine how to streamline BL offerings to accommodate students’ college or career goals, including credit recovery and advanced placement (Barbour et al., 2011 ). Graham ( 2009 ) allocated BL into categories of blends based on various examples observed primarily in higher education (Fig.  2 ).

Copyright 2009 by IGI Global. Adapted with permission

Categories of Blends. Note. Adapted from “Blended Learning Models” by C.R. Graham, in M. Khosrow-Pour (Ed) Encyclopedia of Information and Science Technology (p. 376), 2009, Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

Thus far, all these models and categories characterize BL in terms of the degree of blendedness, delivery modes, and use of technology and other resources but are largely reported in developed countries (Halverson et al., 2012 ). With the pandemic forcing a rapid shift of course delivery to online and remote learning, new directions for BL as a productive new normal are being considered (Megahed & Ghoneim, 2022 ), even in settings with very limited resources (Shohel et al., 2022 ). Hence, further studies are recommended to provide insights into the actual experiences and perspectives of K-12 teachers and students in contexts where BL is emerging (Villanueva, 2021 ). Research in these areas informs BL practices and the professional development of teachers.

BL in the Philippines

A brief review of the K-12 system in the Philippines revealed that within the public schools, there are alternative learning programs targeting independent learners, youths in difficult circumstances, and potential school leavers ( DepEd Order No. 54 s.12 , Phils). These programs under the ADM provide access and flexibility to the current basic education offerings via assistance from ICTs (Seameo-Innotech, 2019 ). One type of ADM is the Open High School Program, which aims to enable youth and adults to continue and complete a secondary education outside of the usual classroom delivery ( Open High School System Act 2014 (Phils) s.2277). Another type of ADM is the eLearning Program, adopted selectively in city school districts. This program capitalizes on the strengths of BL delivery and support from current stakeholders.

Cultural barriers and issues relating to quality access and infrastructure for BL and ICT integration in the K-12 setting are present in the Philippines (Aguinaldo, 2013 ; Kubota et al., 2018 ). Despite these, some Filipino teachers hold favorable attitudes and positive perceptions toward ICT use in their classrooms and high regard for the innovation it provides (Cajilig, 2009 ; Dela Rosa, 2016 ). Some students have gained motivation and confidence while learning with the supplementary use of digital technologies in their classes (Aguinaldo, 2013 ; Carreon, 2018 ); hence, selected schools have provided access to marginalized populations, for which BL and flexible learning options are emerging (Villanueva, 2021 ).

This study aims to determine whether teachers and students experience the same benefits of BL in settings such as the Philippines, in which ICT integration remains a challenge. As such, positive outcomes of this study may be highlighted so that schools may be able to capitalize on their strengths while taking note of strategies and recommendations to further justify BL where conditions allow it to succeed.

Methodology

This study implemented an exploratory case study in three BL classes, which allowed for the exploration of the phenomenon as the major area of interest (Zainal, 2007 ). The BL classes comprised a single case, which was selected through snowball and convenience sampling with the assistance of school principals and teachers in an urban school district. This district was supervised by the Department of Education Central Office. The classes were further delimited to a specific year level and a cohort of learners so that course content and topics were familiar and understandable to the researcher, who was the primary data collection instrument in the qualitative aspects of the research design (Merriam, 2009 ; Stake, 1995 ).

The schools were designated letter codes X, Y, and Z (Table 1 ), with a range of student and teacher participants for the mixed method data collection. Qualitative methods were used primarily to collect data from various sources while being concerned with the search for meaning through multiple views (Creswell, 2012 ). This study included student focus group discussions (FGDs), teacher interviews, and class observations. The quantitative data collection was undertaken through surveys from the sample size indicated in Table 1 .

Data collection and analysis

The data collection was undertaken for 6 months at a time convenient to the participants and under the guidelines set by the school district office to avoid disrupting class schedules. As such, the researcher worked around the realities of data collection in the natural setting of the participants, given their class schedules, deadlines, and major school activities; hence, there are differences in the number of student participants across data collection methods in Table 1 .

Surveys are an effective means to evaluate individual experiences, perceptions, or beliefs and their relationship to the phenomenon under study (Creswell, 1998 ). The researcher found value in using surveys as valid means to establish the profile of the blended learning programs and research participants and gauge their general perception and satisfaction with their BL experiences. Two surveys were administered at different stages of the data collection phase. The first survey was the CoI Survey Part 1, with 35 items adapted from the Likert-scaled instrument validated through an empirical study on higher education by Arbaugh et al. ( 2008 ). This survey measured the overall educational experiences of students through the categories of CP, SP, and TP. A bilingual version was developed from the original open-source survey to ensure proper use among Filipino secondary-level students. This accommodation was provided in consideration of students exposed to the use of English and Filipino as the medium of instruction in their schools. The CoI Survey Part 2 comprised open-ended questions designed to elicit responses on BL interactions. To gauge overall satisfaction, this study administered an adapted version of the “BL Toolkit Survey Instrument” (n.d.), an open-source survey on BL for students. The adaptation comprised six items from the original toolkit and was modified for the K-12 setting, for example, using emojis in the rating scale and corresponding descriptors (e.g., definitely not to definitely , much worse to much better ). In both surveys, data collection on student profiles was included in determining the access to and use of the internet, digital devices, and ICTs. The data analysis from the surveys comprised descriptive statistics, namely, mean, median, and standard deviation for the CoI Survey Part 1 n  = 40 participant responses. These were used in support of qualitative results on CP, SP, and TP.

FGDs are useful, especially when there is limited time for data collection and research participants will be able to offer valuable information (Creswell, 2012 ). In this study, the FGD was undertaken with eight groups to collect additional information and assist the researcher in interpreting class observations. In these FGDs, member checks were undertaken to collect feedback on descriptions of BL interactions and the manifestations of the presences midway through the data collection.

When collected in case study research, interview data become sources of descriptions and interpretations with multiple viewpoints (Stake, 1995 ). A case study affords a flexible flow of questioning (Yin, 2009 ) while the researcher remains able to guide the participant to elicit information through increasingly specific types of questions (Creswell, 2012 ). Due consideration of participants’ views and the researcher’s intent and direction was accommodated in this study. During the interview sessions, teachers were encouraged to share anecdotes and narrate experiences on BL or explain further through follow-up questions, which were open-ended in nature and aligned with the student CoI Survey Part 2 and FGD questions.

The data generated from the quantitative measures were analyzed and reported in conjunction with the qualitative findings in the form of thick descriptions of BL interactions. Thematic analysis was employed for the qualitative data from selected items of the survey results, FGD, interview responses, and class observations. This article covers the results based on the data analysis suggested by Miles and Huberman ( 1994 ). Inferences were formed by coding and writing summaries, teasing out themes, and creating memos (Merriam, 2009 ; Miles & Huberman, 1994 ). The researcher ensured that safeguards for trustworthiness and integrity were used and that ethical protocols were followed throughout the study.

BL as the best of both worlds

BL as the best of both worlds held similar meanings among the students. First, it provided opportunities for students to learn independently and engage in cooperative or collaborative work. A substantial part of students’ “learning on my own” is interactions with content when online. Cooperative learning for the students meant interacting with peers during small-group work while at school, where interacting with their teachers was equally important. When online, they collaborated by relying on each other’s strengths to complete what was required.

CP: Interaction with content

Findings revealed CP’s manifestations because students were actively engaged in their learning and others to accomplish activities. Among all items in the CoI Survey Part 1, CP items gained the highest mean ratings among all the elements. For example, Items CP 24 and CP25 (Table 2 ) revealed that most students described their BL experiences as challenging but triggering their curiosity and motivation to explore questions. The lowest mean score, 3.63, was for Item CP23. Overall, students found that while engaging with the varied content their critical thinking was challenged through the BL face-to-face learning activities, online modules, quizzes, and assessments.

Students generally appreciated the content prepared and posted by their teachers in their school’s learning management system (LMS) and Facebook (FB) Messenger, as well as reading materials in face-to-face classes. In face-to-face lessons, interaction with content was observed during classroom observations, where the content was provided by the teacher during lectures and discussions through the blackboard or whiteboard, a projector, or a television. When online, most students liked the idea of searching for additional content related to current lessons, which can be undertaken conveniently.

Interaction with content also meant that their BL experiences entailed “learning by myself.” To Sheila and Aimee of School X, this kind of interaction involved finding online assessments, which became their “source of knowledge” and a way to challenge themselves “without being taught exactly about it.” Aimee explained that studying on her own was sometimes preferred  "because I feel I can understand more.”

However, Rachel from School Y mentioned that “not everything was really provided in the platforms.” Thus, interaction with content also meant that students actively searched for online content beyond their virtual classrooms as a way to explore and discover knowledge. Some students compared their online search for content as more satisfying than looking at textbooks, where the information and examples were “limited.” Learning from video content became part of their routine as they began to discern which lectures provided additional explanations for their lessons. Students also indicated that through self-study, they practiced more than without it and gained mastery; therefore, their opportunity to achieve higher grades increased. By accomplishing schoolwork online, students perceived that their class preparation improved.

SP: Interaction with peers

Students across class groups generally described that being online and independent studying was “easier,” “fun,” or “challenging.” Going online was an opportunity to interact and socialize and was thus beneficial socially and academically. For the block section of Grade 10 students, being face-to-face in school made them feel part of the school community, where their “small class” ran alongside classes of “regular students.” They had an opportunity to join competitions as a way to make themselves known and engage in school clubs as part of their student life. Likewise, the quantitative results indicated positive ratings of the SP items in the survey. Item SP14 on Affective Expression gained the highest mean rating and lowest standard deviation among all survey items (Table 2 ). Most of the student responses demonstrated the ease of communicating and interacting online through FB Messenger and the LMS platform, as observed in all three items under Interactive Communication, SP17-SP19. These results also demonstrate that online communication among K-12 students is an excellent way to interact and learn. Items under Group Cohesion indicated disparate results, namely, in Item SP20, about trust among classmates and peers while interacting and learning together. Schools X and Y revealed trust maintenance, despite disagreements or issues, among groupmates in the survey. School Z attested to having fewer online and face-to-face collaborations, although connectedness was perceived within their group.

Cooperative learning and collaborative work occurred online and face-to-face, as indicated by most students. Joey of School X said, “You can really see us still buzzing 11:00 at night, still talking about how we are going to do things the following day.” For the students, collaborative work meant engaging in face-to-face small-group work. Ms. Lota was a Filipino language teacher at School X and perceived that face-to-face class time was a better way to conduct cooperative learning, believing that group work was more difficult online than in face-to-face situations. Data from student FGDs indicated otherwise. When online and working together on projects, students collaborated by relying on each other’s strengths to complete what was required. Students from School X described working collaboratively as helping others understand lessons and monitoring each other’s work through the aid of technology.

All teachers viewed the online work as an opportunity for students to do work without much intervention or discussions directed by the teacher. Students noticed their teachers as sometimes being present online and said, “We know they are online, but usually, they let us do the work.” However, for the group of open high school students in School Z, collaborating online was rare owing to the difficulty in finding a common time to be online. Mia said, “I think it’s messier when we have groupings.” Other students stated that some were busy with domestic work or caring for their family members. Home responsibilities were not, however, considered by students as a barrier to their learning. Diego recounted, “I’m comfortable working by myself because I am able to focus.” Doing individual work did not prevent them from asking for help as they continued communicating with their peers about their lessons by private messaging, texting, or email.

TP: Interaction with teachers

The TP findings provided evidence of teachers fulfilling their main function to ensure student learning and content engagement. Students appreciated the teaching through content selected and organized by their teachers and students’ interactions with their teachers. The CoI Survey results of TP revealed that students perceived that all teacher participants in the study were cognizant of their role in organizing the expected topics to be covered and the corresponding content and assessments to make BL worth their time. In the Design and Organization category were Items TP1 and TP2, which related to how the teachers set the curriculum and communicate subject topics and goals. Item TP4 pertained to the communication of time parameters and received the highest mean rating, 4.25, in that category (Table 2 ). The timelines were perceived to provide structure and focus for the work that students would complete individually or in groups. However, students mentioned that they rarely received online feedback, revealed by the results of Item TP13, with a mean rating of 3.57, under the Direct Instruction category. Thus, receiving feedback was a general concern among the students. Item TP6, in the Facilitating Discourse category, received the highest mean rating, 4.30, among all the TP items on the CoI Survey. The item pertained to student questions and discussions encouraged during the classroom observation. Students’ online conversations were mainly conducted in their group chats to help each other understand lessons, indicating TP was driven by students.

Data from teacher participants supported students’ views of their BL experiences, as well as their positive experiences of their concrete actions. Teachers mentioned posting links in their LMS or through FB groups, which students described as useful information they appreciated. Ms. Lota ensured that her learning activities were posted accordingly, with clear instructions and deadlines. Mr. Bobby, another language teacher, posted additional activities using Google Classroom and in “every mode made possible” to provide the information directly to his students. Ms. Jessie, the science teacher, posted additional reminders to guide first-year BL students. Hence, BL experiences across the classes were perceived by the students as “learning more.”

Teachers expressed that when face-to-face, “we really see students recite and participate.” Sienna of School X noticed that sometimes, self-study was insufficient, stating that “the face-to-face sessions help us understand more [than the online sessions]” because they saw their teacher explain the homework. Class times were also ways to complete administrative tasks. Mr. Earl of School X observed that teachers received and checked submissions and provided general feedback face-to-face. Students of School Y also mentioned that being in school meant opportunities to resolve interpersonal issues with the guidance of their Homeroom Adviser or Guidance Counselor.

Learning anytime, anywhere

For students, BL mostly meant staying connected for easy access to the information they needed, regardless of location, learning anytime and anywhere. They went as far as saying that studying can occur while “at a relative’s house,” “by the river or amidst nature,” and “while on family vacation without having to bring books.” Teachers also observed the flexibility that BL afforded the students, and one teacher said, “They can work and fit their schedule around their learning more easily.” This observation was especially true for some students who had domestic responsibilities at home or day jobs. Flexibility for students also meant that they managed their time for studying and recreational activities. Teresa of School X stated, “You don’t always get pressured because your time is yours. You decide how to schedule your time.” Even an intermittent internet connection did not pose much of a problem for students, who mentioned, “We have classmates located in mountainous areas where internet is not always good. While at school, we tell them in advance that if they can go online at a certain time, we will just give the detailed points.” As such, students relied consistently on chatting using FB Messenger, accessed through their inexpensive mobile plans.

Two homeroom advisers mentioned that an open line of communication was valuable for various reasons. Mr. Bobby said, “I cannot just abandon them to do things on their own. It’s hard for me only to see them face-to-face. I need to have a connection with them always, anytime, from wherever they are.” Ms. Jessie remarked, “I also contact parents or guardians because they have a major responsibility over their children. They help the teachers remind their children to do the assessments.” For Mr. Earl, an eLearning Coordinator, staying connected was important for monitoring technical glitches and ensuring issues could be resolved immediately to sustain learning.

However, the view of learning anytime, anywhere implied different notions of time and space to learn and work among the teachers and students. Ms. Jessie perceived that BL benefited her students with learning needs, who were afforded extended time to complete their work because “the class is 24 hours open.” Teachers also believed that BL students had “more time” to do schoolwork than regular students or in traditional classrooms. Some students, however, shared an additional perspective on this notion of “more time.” Students from Class X indicated that teachers assumed that the students had “more time;” thus, their amount of academic work was more than for their face-to-face classes. Having additional work made the students feel that their time to comply with the academic requirements was limited. Thus, for most of the students, BL was also described as “challenging” and a way to learn responsibility and time management.

Learning with technology

The BL Toolkit survey demonstrated that most students in the FGD reported on their access to laptops/gadgets and the internet and the frequency of the types of technology they used to complete their online work. Results based on n = 21 responses across three schools are depicted in Fig.  3 .

Results from blended learning survey: internet access. Note . Adapted from “Investigating Experiences and Outcomes in K-12 Blended Learning Classes through the Community of Inquiry Framework” by J.A. Villanueva, 2020, p. 131. ( https://eprints.usq.edu.au/40350/ ). Doctoral Dissertation. University of Southern Queensland.

The aforementioned provided an overall picture of student experiences of BL and ICT use. The CoI Survey Part 1 did not investigate student ICT use in detail, such as how they accessed the internet and used various ICTs for interaction and learning.

An item in the CoI Survey Part 2 collected student profiles to determine the frequency of use of selected ICTs and applications while engaged in BL (Fig.  4 ).

Results from CoI survey part 2: frequency of ICT use. Note . Adapted from “Investigating Experiences and Outcomes in K-12 Blended Learning Classes through the Community of Inquiry Framework” by J.A. Villanueva, 2020, p. 131. ( https://eprints.usq.edu.au/40350/ ). Doctoral Dissertation. University of Southern Queensland

As revealed above, the use of the LMS and group chats on FB Messenger were the primary means for students to accomplish their online work. Text messaging was sometimes used, and group emails were used the least. The students’ top three preferences were group chats and the LMS platform, because they are officially sanctioned by the school, and other ICT applications. Students indicated that they used other educational websites and applications. Students also mentioned using programs they had learned through their ICT subjects, such as Github, Circuito, and Photoshop, and other sites accessed at their preference or depending on the content that was covered in class, for example, Wikipedia, Khan Academy, YouTube, and Google Scholar.

The results of the Blended Learning Toolkit included those from items related to BL satisfaction, interaction, and technology. One item considered the extent to which technology affected the students’ interactions with their classmates and teachers (Fig.  5 ).

Results from blended learning toolkit survey items on technology and blended learning. Note . Adapted from “Investigating Experiences and Outcomes in K-12 Blended Learning Classes through the Community of Inquiry Framework” by J.A. Villanueva, 2020, p. 132. ( https://eprints.usq.edu.au/40350/ ). Doctoral Dissertation. University of Southern Queensland.

In Fig.  5 , most students recognized the effect of technology on their interactions with their teachers and classmates. Most students responded that technology produced “a little better” to “much better” effect on their BL interactions with teachers and classmates. These results indicate a positive effect on the students’ BL interactions.

The results on student satisfaction and preference for BL are depicted in Fig.  6 . Most students were satisfied with their BL classes and wanted to continue with BL rather than attending regular daily class sessions. Regarding the level of student satisfaction with BL, most students generally perceived technology as a positive contribution to their BL interactions. These findings elucidate the role of technology in their daily lives as students and as adolescent learners participating in BL.

Items from blended learning survey with student participants. Note . Adapted from “Investigating Experiences and Outcomes in K-12 Blended Learning Classes through the Community of Inquiry Framework” by J.A. Villanueva, 2020, p. 133. ( https://eprints.usq.edu.au/40350/ ). Doctoral Dissertation. University of Southern Queensland.

Some students expressed, “I like the online study,” mainly due to the use of ICTs “to encounter a new method of learning which is a great way to test my mind” and “It’s like motivation to study every day.” Students enjoyed the challenge of using ICT applications such as video editing and photo editing. In contrast with these positive experiences of BL related to technology, one subject teacher said, “There is also the problem of internet connection. It has to be very good.” Thus, technology use was dependent on good internet access.

Teachers and students perceived BL as either “different,” “emerging,” “innovative,” or a “new adventure.” Teachers’ explanations were related to the use of technology. Mr. Wilfred posited that implementing BL helped him “keep abreast with the 21 st -century trends” and “devise different teaching approaches.” Mr. Earl had used BL for 4 years and said that BL was “by far, the most challenging way of teaching.” As an ICT subject teacher and the eLearning Coordinator of School X, he perceived that the biggest challenge was “to gain the commitment of the teachers to grasp and embrace the program.”

BL was described as an opportunity for teachers and students to improve their skills for using technology. Teachers perceived that they were able to enhance their ICT skills and think of other strategies to teach. Mr. Bobby said, “There is so much more to learn and discover. It helps teachers innovate teaching strategies and techniques.” A student expressed an appreciation for honing her skills through BL and said, “I can use my training on self-studying for future use and the talent I acquired from using applications, especially in college.” Beyond learning ICT skills, a few students stated that BL was a means of improving their leadership skills, group work skills, socialization, and behavior.

What is the nature of interaction in BL classes?

Unlike most studies on BL, which have focused on either face-to-face and online work or comparisons between these modes of delivery (Halverson et al., 2014 ), this study examined interactions in a more integrative way. In doing so, this research revealed that students and teachers viewed their face-to-face and online experiences as positive. They sensed continuity in their activities, lessons, and communications because teachers and students used offline and online activities to keep connected. Teachers performed these actions consciously, but students seemed to perform them intuitively and incidentally. For homeroom teachers in this study, social interactions provided opportunities to build rapport and relationships while keeping connected. These important community building processes have been observed in face-to-face adult communities or organizations (Manalili, 2013 ; Peck, 2010 ) and in higher education (Villanueva & Librero, 2010 ). This study demonstrated similar findings in the context of the Philippine K-12 system; thus, this study adds to the data on BL in Asia and in the K-12 context.

BL interactions were also perceived as a means for students to socialize, creating a feeling of connectedness for students. A sense of community has been observed among adult members of virtual and fully online learning communities, as well as in blended and fully online courses (Chatterjee & Correia, 2020 ; Liu, 2007 ; Shea, 2006 ). These studies, however, were mostly undertaken in higher education settings. This study revealed that BL promoted a sense of community among K-12 students. The feeling of connectedness is due to varied interactions, especially with their teachers and peers, which are perceived by high school students and teachers to be important. Thus far, this study has established that student satisfaction, perceived learning, and a sense of community are outcomes of K-12 BL interactions. Contrastingly, other studies revealed that these outcomes are not solely attributed to BL but are influenced by the role of technology (Deutsch, 2010 ; Lomicka & Lord, 2007 ; Velasquez et al., 2013 ) and the choice of media (Deng & Tavares, 2013 ; Milošević et al., 2015 ). These aspects are further analyzed in the following sections.

Use of social media

Being transparent regarding their social media profiles and comments was an accepted practice among the teachers and students. Interactions using FB Messenger group chat sustained communication and learning between teachers and students. These findings reinforced prior findings in support of social media as a powerful tool for interaction, learning, and keeping connected, although these studies were mostly undertaken with adults (Bowers-Campbell, 2008 ; Milošević et al., 2015 ; Waiyahong, 2014 ). Facebook is an inexpensive, practical means to stay connected in the Philippines; therefore, the teachers and students maximized its use. When chatting over social media, social interactions are generally accepted as part of learning because adolescent learners seem to undertake this naturally through exposure to Facebook on their mobile phones.

This study provided evidence of the effective use of Facebook for learning through mobile phones at a time when government officials in the Philippines questioned its use in class-related work and classrooms (Hernando-Malipot, 2019 ). The positive experiences of BL established in this study reinforce the current actions implemented in these BL classes to set guidelines to monitor proper usage of Facebook rather than have a blanket policy of non-usage.

Role of technology

Similar to findings from research on blended and online learning in higher education, this study found that technology provided motivation and was a positive medium for the attainment of shared goals. These findings support those of K-12 research on BL in Western countries, as reported by Staker and Horn ( 2012 ). In the Philippine setting, the added motivation among high school students can be attributed to the satisfaction of searching online, learning ICT skills, and being able to experience them independently. The study found that the opportunity to use computers, digital devices, and programs available in their school environment also attracted students to BL programs while allowing for flexibility and autonomy in learning. This study reported on the overall positive perception of the use of technology and the experience of BL. These positive outcomes also resulted in positive views on the role of technology in the students’ current and future careers. As such, this study should be able to leverage additional support for the integration of ICTs in schools and for policies in the distribution and use of educational ICT applications and devices among Filipino secondary-level students. The support needed is further justified by recent shifts to distance education and online learning in higher education in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

In the literature, access to the internet and computers were reported as major barriers to blended and online learning in the Philippines and overall ICT integration in classrooms (Aguinaldo, 2013 ; Barbour et al., 2011 ; Kubota et al., 2018 ). However, this study revealed that pre-pandemic, forms of BL programs were used in the public school system (Appendix A). Residing in an urban area with sufficient access to technology enabled the BL programs to sustain and enhance learning experiences among K-12 teachers and students. The use of LMS platforms and FB Messenger combined with the student’s choice of ICT applications and online sources demonstrated the enabling role of technology in BL interactions while students were learning independently and with others. Despite the shift to entirely online and remote learning during the pandemic, schools will probably gradually open in the forthcoming school year, with an increased value placed on the use of ICTs in teaching and learning. As such, the BL programs documented in this study demonstrate that pedagogy and technology use as developmental and at different stages. K-12 schools may consider and learn from these BL programs and consider learning community building, as discussed in the next section.

How do the interactions indicate learning communities as outcomes of BL?

This study revealed forms of interaction in the context of K-12 learners provide a sense of community, a construct examined in higher education research (McMillan & Chavis, 1986 ; Rovai, 2002 ). This study showed how teachers use offline and online activities to keep connected as a learning community: teachers did so consciously, and students seemed to do so intuitively and incidentally. For homeroom teachers in this study, social interactions provided opportunities to build rapport and relationships while keeping connected. These important processes of community building have been observed in face-to-face adult communities or organizations (Hope & Timmel, 1984 ; Peck, 2010 ) and distance education classes (Murphy & Rodríguez-Manzanares, 2012 ). This study affirmed that community building was also observable in the context of the Philippine K-12 system. This study found that the process of learning community building is dynamic and evolving as teachers and students continue to enact and experience what it means to be a learning community within the conditions afforded by their BL classes and through their choice and use of technologies. Moreover, the findings illuminated evidence of learning communities as outcomes of K-12 BL classes through the CoI presences and corresponding levels of interaction, where connectedness and learning socially with peers were reinforced in both face-to-face and online interactions.

The dynamics of learning community building, indicated by the BL programs in the Philippines, aligned with other those of models of BL in research outside the Philippines on the use of ICTs and pedagogies (Appendix A). Graham ( 2009 ) discussed the categories and levels of blendedness in Western countries because these relate to interaction and technology use and access (Fig.  1 ). Enabling blends were described as focusing on access and convenience issues to ensure both modes deliver “equivalent” learning experiences; enhancing blends resulted to positive changes to pedagogy through additional resources (Graham, 2009 ). This study found meaning in these categories to further understand and appreciate BL in its emergent stages and in relation to learning community building and the role of technology. An enabling blend was indicated through BL at the class level of open high school students in School Z, where the time and space allowed for face-to-face interactions once per week in school. The use of FB Messenger addresses the issue of access. Moreover, FB was used to maintain open, interactive communication between teachers and students in School Z. An enhancing blend was demonstrated by School Y students and teachers who were willing to invest time engaging with content in their LMS and anticipate interacting with their peers and teachers. A transformative blend was indicated by School X, a block section of high school students who have been classmates for more than 3 years in a Science high school, through face-to-face and online collaborations facilitated by the teacher or driven by students and enriched through the use of various ICTs.

This study suggests that further investigation of learning communities is required. The outcomes of the K-12 BL interactions through the three elements of the CoI framework, specifically CP, SP, and TP, along with its intersections, require further research (Parker & Herrington, 2015 ; Peacock & Cowan, 2016 ). The CoI elements have been validated as distinct measures of educational experiences in higher education for almost two decades (Castellanos-Reyes, 2019), and further research in the K-12 setting has been recommended (Befus, 2019; Garrison, 2017 ). Such studies increase the appreciation for BL through evidence supportive of the dynamics of learning community building across the categories of blends, illustrated by the CoI framework embedded in Fig.  7 .

Developmental model of K-12 blended learning communities by Villanueva ( 2020 ). Note. Adapted from “Blended Learning Models” by C.R. Graham, in M. Khosrow-Pour (Ed), Encyclopedia of Information and Science Technology ( p. 376), 2009, Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

On the basis of a developmental model, this study posits that as teachers and students, in enabling blends and enhancing blends, enact learning community building and engage in constructivist learning, the intersections of the CoI presences increase in prominence. This model serves to guide, inform, and influence K-12 BL practices as interactions within BL classes and/or programs, which have the potential to become transformative blends. In improving the understanding of learning community building as a developmental process within K-12 BL, the aforementioned model is therefore recommended for further application and research, especially in non-Western contexts and developing countries in Asia where BL have promising possibilities.

Limitations

This research was an exploratory case study. Hence, the findings and results are only generalizable to the specific population and context of the Philippine K-12 system where BL classes and programs have been implemented. The study was conducted with a limited number of participants, and consent was provided by their parents. Data collection was also within the boundaries of time accorded by the selected K-12 schools to conform to the Department of Education Division Office's protocols for data collection. For example, the face-to-face class observations were challenging to schedule because these coincided with major school activities, assessments, and examinations. The stored data of online classes were subject to what students or teachers were willing to share and discuss. However, these still contributed to having a sufficient amount of data collected through the student FGD and teacher interviews to explore the presences in relation to community building. Despite these limitations, the results and their applicability in the study context are valid. The validity is based on the triangulation of data afforded by the qualitative methodology applied.

This study examined BL interactions through three surrounding themes and with corresponding elements of the CoI framework across levels of interaction. The themes included BL as the best of both worlds, learning anytime and anywhere, and learning with technology. These themes have been referred to in higher education research on BL, which found relevance in the Philippine K-12 setting even before the shift to remote and online learning due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The evidence attested to the essential value or important meanings of BL among Filipino students and their teachers.

Opportunities for technology integration and BL was evidenced by different BL programs implemented at three public schools in the Philippines: (a) a regular school with teacher-driven BL class under an open high school program; (b) a premier Science High School with a parallel BL block section for each level, and (c) a regular school with a school-wide BL at the high school levels. The last two schools had eLearning Programs supported by the city’s government and the Schools Division Office. Conditions in these schools are representative of those in the city schools or municipal school districts selected by the Department of Education in the Philippines. These BL programs have thrived within settings that allowed teachers and students to gain positive teaching and learning experiences. In the case of the Philippine K-12 system, BL programs were initiated at the classroom and school district levels, and its main drivers are students, teachers, and school leaders.

This study established the importance of using other measures of BL to complement the CoI Survey based on Arbaugh et al.’s ( 2008 ) CoI instrument validated in higher education. The results from the open-source BL Toolkit Survey and the CoI instrument adapted for Filipino K-12 teachers and students, which included open-ended questions, revealed aspects of BL that held unique meanings among the participants in this study. For example the interactions with teachers alongside the use of ICTs, were found to be equally valuable to secondary school students. The results indicated the role of technology and the stakeholders’ support of technology as enabling conditions within the school system to ensure teacher and student participation in BL programs.

The results justify BL as an innovation deserving support within the Philippine educational system. The outcomes point to apply to maintaining current classroom pedagogies or gradually infusing constructivist teaching approaches under the guidance of this study’s proposed Developmental Model of K-12 Learning Community Building. With further research to generate advocacy for supportive mechanisms and enabling conditions to succeed, BL may prove to be beneficial to other teachers and students. Studies highlighting BL practices at the K-12 could become more widespread and facilitate better ways to teach and learn in the Philippines. Studies leading to measurable outcomes could then be undertaken, using quantitative studies using dual language instruments and covering other student populations and research locales. Thus, how to advocate for BL through the CoI framework may be included in teacher professional development to inform the stakeholders of the direct and indirect benefits of these BL programs.

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions.

Aguinaldo, B. E. (2013). Implementing blended learning in an impoverished academic institution using a bricolage approach model. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 3 (2), 211–216. https://doi.org/10.7763/IJIET.2013.V3.266

Article   Google Scholar  

Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing context. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5 (2), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v5i2.1875

Arbaugh, J. B., Cleveland-Innes, M., Diaz, S. R., Garrison, D. R., Ice, P., Richardson, L., & Swan, K. P. (2008). Developing a community of inquiry instrument: Testing a measure of the Community of Inquiry framework using a multi-institutional sample. The Internet and Higher Education, 11 (3–4), 133–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2008.06.003

Arbaugh, J. B., Bangert, A., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2010). Subject matter effects and the community of inquiry (COI) framework: An exploratory study. The Internet and Higher Education, 13 (1), 37–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.006

Barbour, M., Brown, R., Waters, L., Hoey, R., Hunt, J. L., Kennedy, K., Ounsworth, C., Powell, A. & Trimm, T. (2011). Online and blended learning: A survey of policy and practice from K-12 schools around the world . International Association for K-12 Online Learning.

Barbour, M., & Reeves, T. (2009). The reality of virtual schools: A review of the literature. Computers & Education, 52 (2), 402–416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.09.009

Barbour, M. (2018). A history of K–12 distance, online, and blended learning worldwide. In K. Kennedy & R. E. Ferdig (Eds.), Handbook of research on K–12 online and blended learning (2nd ed., pp. 21–40). Carnegie Mellon University ETC Press.

Befus, M. (2016). Conducting a multivocal thematic synthesis on an extensive body of literature. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 42 (2), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.21432/T2789B

Blended Learning Toolkit Survey Instrument. (n.d.). https://blended.online.ucf.edu/2011/06/07/survey-instruments/

Bonifacio, A. L. (2013). Developing Information Communication Technology (ICT) curriculum standards for K-12 schools in the Philippines . [Paper presentation] The Sixth Conference of MIT's Learning International Networks Consortium, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA. https://linc.mit.edu/linc2013/proceedings/Session7/Session7Bonifacio.pdf

Bowers-Campbell, J. (2008). Cyber “pokes”: Motivational antidote for developmental college readers. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 39 (1), 74–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/10790195.2008.10850313

Cajilig, N. (2009). Integration of information and communication technology in mathematics teaching in Metro Manila public secondary schools. Education Quarterly, 67 (1), 79–91.

Google Scholar  

Carreon, J. T. (2018). Facebook as integrated blended learning tool in technology and livelihood education exploratory. International Journal of Educational Technology, 5 (2), 19–25.

Castellanos-Reyes, D. (2020). 20 years of the Community of Inquiry framework. TechTrends . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-020-00491-7

Chatterjee, R., & Correia, A. P. (2020). Online students’ attitudes toward collaborative learning and sense of community. American Journal of Distance Education, 34 (1), 53–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2020.1703479

Christensen, C. M., Horn, M. B., & Staker, H. (2013 ). Is K-12 blended learning disruptive? An introduction to the theory of hybrids . Clayton Christensen Institute. https://www.christenseninstitute.org/wpcontent/uploads/2014/06/Is-K-12-blended-learning-disruptive.pdf

Creswell, J. (1998). Qualitative research and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Sage.

Creswell, J. (2012). Collecting qualitative data. In Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed., pp. 204–235). Pearson Education, Inc.

Dela Rosa, J. P. O. (2016). Experiences, perceptions and attitudes on ICT integration: A case study among novice and experienced language teachers in the Philippines. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology, 12 (3), 37–57.

DepEd Order No. 54 s.12 . (Phils). Policy guidelines on the implementation of alternative delivery modes https://www.deped.gov.ph/2012/06/15/do-54-s-2012-policy-guidelines-on-the-implementation-of-alternative-delivery-modes-adms/ .

Deng, L., & Tavares, N. J. (2013). From Moodle to Facebook: Exploring students’ motivation and experiences in online communities. Computers & Education, 68 , 167–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.04.028

Deutsch, N. (2010). Instructor experiences with implementing technology in blended learning courses . CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.

Graham, C. R. (2009). Blended learning models. In M. Khosrow-Pour (Ed.), Encyclopedia of information science and technology (2nd ed., pp. 375–382). IGI Global.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Garrison, D. R. (2017). E-learning in the twenty-first century: A community of inquiry framework for research and practice . Routledge.

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2 (2–3), 87–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 15 (1), 7–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923640109527071

Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7 (2), 95–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001

Halverson, L. R., Graham, C. R., Spring, K. J., & Drysdale, J. S. (2012). An analysis of high impact scholarship and publication trends in blended learning. Distance Education, 33 (3), 381–413. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2012.723166

Halverson, L. R., Spring, K. J., Huyett, S., Henrie, C. R., & Graham, C. R. (2017). Blended learning research in higher education and K-12 settings. In M. J. Spector, B. B. Lockee, & M. D. Childress (Eds.), Learning, design, and technology: An international compendium of theory, research, practice, and policy (pp. 1–30). Springer International Publishing.

Halverson, L. R., Graham, C. R., Spring, K. J., Drysdale, J. S., & Henrie, C. R. (2014). A thematic analysis of the most highly cited scholarship in the first decade of blended learning research. The Internet and Higher Education, 20 , 20–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.09.004

Hernando-Malipot, M. (2019, July 1). DepEd discourages use of social media in classrooms; potential cyber threat cited, News. Manila Bulletin . https://news.mb.com.ph/2019/07/01/deped-discourages-use-of-social-media-in-classrooms-potential-cyber-threat-cited/

Hope, A., & Timmel, S. (1984). Training for transformation: A handbook for community workers . Mambo Press.

Book   Google Scholar  

Hu, M., Arnesen, K., Barbour, M. K., & Leary, H. (2019). A newcomer’s lens: A look at K-12 online and blended learning. Journal of Online Learning Research, 5 (2), 123–144. https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/j/JOLR/v/5/n/2/

Kubota, K., Yamamoto, R., & Morioka, H. (2018). Promoting ICT education in developing countries: Case study in the Philippines [Paper presentation]. International Conference for Media in Education, Busan, Republic of Korea. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228655099

Liu, S., Gomez, J., Khan, B., & Yen, C.-J. (2007). Toward a learner-oriented community college online course dropout framework. International Journal on ELearning, 6 (4), 519–542. https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/21789/

Lomicka, L., & Lord, G. (2007). Social presence in virtual communities of foreign language (FL) teachers. System, 35 (2), 208–228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2006.11.002

Manalili, A. G. (2013). Ang proseso ng pag-oorganisa ng pamayanan na mula sa tao para sa tao. Daluyan: Journal ng Wikang Filipino, 19 (1), 64–97.

McMillan, D. W., & Chavis, D. M. (1986). Sense of community: A definition and theory. Journal of Community Psychology, 14 (1), 6–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6629(198601)14:1%3c6::AID-JCOP2290140103%3e3.0.CO;2-I

Megahed, N., & Ghoneim, E. (2022). Blended learning: the new normal for post-Covid-19 pedagogy. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, 14 (1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJMBL.291980

Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation . Jossey-Bass.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Sage.

Milošević, I., Živković, D., Arsić, S., & Manasijević, D. (2015). Facebook as virtual classroom—Social networking in learning and teaching among Serbian students. Telematics and Informatics, 32 (4), 576–585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2015.02.003

Moore, M. G. (1989). Editorial: Three types of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 3 (2), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923648909526659

Murphy, E., & Rodríguez-Manzanares, M. A. (2012). Rapport in distance education. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 13 (1), 167–190. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v13i1.1057

Open High School System Act 2014s s. 2277 . (Philippines). https://legacy.senate.gov.ph/lisdata/1930116434!.pdf

Parker, J., & Herrington, J. (2015). Setting the climate in an authentic online community of learning . [Paper presentation].Annual Meeting of the Australian Association of Research in Education, Freemantle, Western Australia. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED593827.pdf

Peacock, S., & Cowan, J. (2016). From presences to linked influences within communities of inquiry. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17 (5), 267–283. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v17i5.2602

Peck, M. S. (2010). The different drum: Community making and peace . Simon and Schuster.

Picciano, A. G., Dziuban, C. D., & Graham, C. R. (Eds.). (2013). Blended learning: Research perspectives (Vol. 2). London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315880310

Poirier, M., Law, J. M., & Veispak, A. (2019). A spotlight on lack of evidence supporting the integration of blended learning in K-12 education: A systematic review. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, 11 (4), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJMBL.2019100101

Rovai, A. P. (2002). Building sense of community at a distance. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 3 (1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v3i1.79

Seameo-Innotech. (2019). Re-examining the responsiveness of secondary level alternative delivery modes: Case studies of selected open high school program (OHSP) schools in the Philippines serving marginalized learners. https://www.seameo-innotech.org/portfolio_page/re-examining-the-responsiveness-of-secondary-level-alternative-delivery-modes/

Shea, P. (2006). A study of students’ sense of learning community in online environments. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 10 (1), 35–44. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v10i1.1774

Shohel, M. M. C., Ashrafuzzaman, M., Azim, F., Naomee, I., Rahman, M. S., & Siddik, M. A. B. (2022). Blended learning space for primary and secondary education: challenges and opportunities in resource-constrained contexts. In T.L. Driscoll (Ed), Designing Effective Distance and Blended Learning Environments in K-12 (pp. 187–222). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-6829-3.ch012

Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research . Sage.

Staker, H., & Horn, M. B. (2012). Classifying K-12 blended learning . Clayton Christensen Institute. https://www.christenseninstitute.org/wpcontent/uploads/2013/04/Classifying-K-12-blended-learning.pdf

Staker, H., & Horn, M. B. (2014). Blended learning in the K-12 education sector. In A. G. Picciano, C. D. Dzuban, & C. R. Graham (Eds.), Blended learning: Research perspectives (Vol. 2, pp. 287–303). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315880310

Swan, K. (2002). Building learning communities in online courses: The importance of interaction. Education, Communication & Information, 2 (1), 23–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/1463631022000005016

Swan, K. (2003). Learning effectiveness online: What the research tells us. In J. Bourne & J. C. Moore (Eds.), Elements of Quality Online Education, Practice and Direction (pp. 13–45), Vol. 4 in the Sloan C Series . Sloan Center for Online Education.

Swan, K., & Ice, P. (2010). The community of inquiry framework ten years later: Introduction to the special issue. The Internet and Higher Education, 13 (1–2), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.11.003

Velasquez, A., Graham, C. R., & West, R. E. (2013). An investigation of practices and tools that enabled technology-mediated caring in an online high school. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 14 (5), 277–299. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v14i5.1465

Villanueva, J. A. R. (2020). Investigating experiences and outcomes of K–12 blended learning classes through the Community of Inquiry framework [Doctoral dissertation, University of Southern Queensland]. USQ ePrints. https://eprints.usq.edu.au/40350/

Villanueva, J. A. R. (2021). Teaching presence in K–12 blended learning classes under the alternative delivery mode. International Journal on Online Distance and eLearning, 7 (1), 31–52. https://ijodel.com/index.php/ijodel/article/view/33

Villanueva, J. A. R., & Librero, A. F. D. (2010). Building a sense of community at the UP Open University community site. [Paper presentation]. ICT2010 Singapore Conference, SIM University, Singapore.

Villanueva, J., Redmond, P., & Galligan, L. (2022). Manifestations of cognitive presence in blended learning classes of the Philippine K-12 system. Online Learning, 26 (1), 19–37. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v26i1.302

Waiyahong, N. (2014). The use of “Facebook” to build an LIS student learning community. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 147 , 98–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.07.124

Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods . Sage.

Zainal, Z. (2007). Case study as a research method. UTM Jurnal Kemanusiaan, 5 (1), 1–6. https://jurnalkemanusiaan.utm.my/index.php/kemanusiaan/article/view/165

Download references

Acknowledgements

This article is based on a dissertation made possible through the assistance of the U.P. Open University Faculty of Education and the Office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs of the University of the Philippines-System.

This study was funded by the University of the Philippines-System through a Doctoral Study Grant under the Faculty, REPS and Administrative Staff Development Program.

Author information

Petrea Redmond, Linda Galligan and Douglas Eacersall have contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

Faculty of Education, University of the Philippines Open University, Los Banos, Philippines

Juliet Aleta R. Villanueva

School of Education, University of Southern Queensland, Baker Street, Toowoomba, QLD, 4031, Australia

Petrea Redmond

School of Mathematics, Physics and Computing, University of Southern Queensland, Baker Street, Toowoomba, QLD, 4031, Australia

Linda Galligan

Library Services, University of Southern Queensland, Baker Street, Toowoomba, QLD, 4031, Australia

Douglas Eacersall

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Juliet Aleta R. Villanueva .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Ethical approval

The authors received approval from the ethics review board of the University of Southern Queensland for this study.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 18 kb)

Supplementary file2 (docx 22 kb), rights and permissions.

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Villanueva, J.A.R., Redmond, P., Galligan, L. et al. Investigating blended learning interactions in Philippine schools through the community of inquiry framework. Asia Pacific Educ. Rev. (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-023-09826-4

Download citation

Received : 30 May 2022

Revised : 18 January 2023

Accepted : 19 January 2023

Published : 16 February 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-023-09826-4

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Blended learning
• Community of inquiry
• Philippine schools
• Learning communities
• Open high school
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Reference Manager
• Simple TEXT file

People also looked at

Original research article, developing a community of inquiry using an educational blog in higher education from the perspective of bangladesh.

• 1 Institute of Education and Research (IER), University of Dhaka, Dhaka, Bangladesh
• 2 School of Education and Social Sciences, University of the West of Scotland, Paisley, United Kingdom

Web 2.0 tools such as blogs, wikis, social networking, and podcasting have received attention in educational research over the last decade. Blogs enable students to reflect their learning experiences, disseminate ideas, and participate in analytical thinking. The Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework has been widely used in educational research to understand and enhance online and blended learning platforms. There is insufficient research evidence to demonstrate the impact of educational blogging using the CoI model as a framework. This article explores how blogs can be used to support collaborative learning and how such an interaction upholds CoI through enhancing critical thinking and meaningful learning in the context of higher education (HE). An exploratory sequential mixed-method approach has been followed in this study. A convenience sampling method was employed to choose 75 undergraduate students from Dhaka University for a 24-week blogging project. Every publication on the blog was segmented into meaningful units. Whole texts of posts and comments are extracted from the blog, and the transcripts are analyzed in a qualitative manner considering the CoI framework, more specifically, through the lens of cognitive, social, and teaching presence. In addition, the semi-structured questionnaire is used to collect data from students irrespective of whether blogging expedited students' learning or not. The research findings indicate that cognitive presence, namely, the exploration component, is dominant in blog-based learning activity. Moreover, this research has demonstrated that blogs build reliable virtual connections among students through exchanging ideas and information and by offering opportunities for reflective practice and asynchronous feedback. This study also revealed challenges related to blogging in the context of developing countries, including lack of familiarity with blogs, restricted internet connectivity, limited access to devices, and low levels of social interaction. It is recommended that different stakeholders including policymakers, curriculum developers, and teachers take the initiative to synchronize the utilization of educational blogs with the formal curriculum, guaranteeing that blog activities supplement and improve traditional teaching–learning activities.

1 Introduction

The prevalence of online learning is rapidly expanding and has become more advanced due to ongoing technological improvements ( Seaman et al., 2018 ). Web 2.0 tools, such as blogs, wikis, social networking, media sharing, and podcasting, allow for self-directed, collaborative, and widespread learning by sharing resources, regardless of physical or geographical constraints ( Song and Bonk, 2016 ). For instance, blogs can be used in online and blended learning platforms to foster students' reflective learning ( Milad, 2017 ), developing learning communities through several strategies like posting students' work, exchanging hyperlinks, and so on ( Kerawalla et al., 2009 ). In this connection, several researchers added that blogging has obvious advantages to form the Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework and to trigger meaningful learning through improving the social, cognitive, and teaching presence ( Cameron and Anderson, 2006 ; Petit et al., 2023 ). In addition, effective instructional strategies and facilitation of discourse guided by teachers are more significant in creating CoI than any other approach ( Garrison and Akyol, 2013 ). Additionally, Jimoyiannis et al. (2012) argued that properly designed blog activities can help students achieve higher cognitive levels by enhancing their communication and collaboration skills and their critical thinking. However, despite the widespread excitement and curiosity around the learning design framework and online learning environments, there is a lack of research on the educational influence of learning designs ( Bower, 2017 ). Shifting to the reality of the COVID-19 pandemic and the widespread adoption of online learning, the pandemic has initiated a radical and rapid rethinking of the teaching–learning arrangement. The challenge was to provide guidance and support to educators to shift their curriculum to an online environment ( Garrison, 2020 ). The CoI framework may provide a coherent representation of relevant information and the means to navigate between theoretical and practical sources of information ( Garrison, 2020 ). Hence, it is vital to examine how CoI inquiry could be designed and implemented in online environments. Additionally, there is a lack of research evidence to demonstrate the impact of educational blogging when using the CoI model as a framework. Moreover, no research article on the use of educational blogs for a higher education level in Bangladesh has been found yet. The study aims to investigate the potential of the blogging environment in assisting higher education students in their learning process, focusing on key elements of the CoI framework. Hence, the following research questions will be addressed:

i. What is the nature of the students' interaction in the educational blogging practice?

ii. How does participating in blog-based learning activity support students' learning experience?

iii. What problems do the students confront while engaging in educational blogging?

2 Literature review

Blogs can be characterized as a web-based archive displaying contents in reverse chronological entry date. People with little technical knowledge can publish as well as share their thoughts, opinions, and emotions with others using blogs ( Pifarré et al., 2014 ). The use of blogging technologies by students in educational settings is on the rise globally ( Ifinedo, 2017 ). Blogs are commonly advocated as collaborative tools that facilitate active learning among students ( Jimoyiannis and Angelaina, 2012 ). However, the rate of users' participation can diverge from session to session and blog to blog ( Lawrence et al., 2010 ). Blogs can create an online collaborative portfolio for course-related resources, assignments, calendars, events, teaching experiences, open discussions, students' queries, and so on ( Kaya et al., 2012 ). Hence, blogs can play a vital role in establishing the learning community as well as encouraging interpersonal communication among teachers and students of higher education ( Kaçar, 2021 ).

The analysis of the educational use of blogs often involves various methods and frameworks to understand the dynamics, engagement, and impact of the blog content ( Kaul et al., 2018 ). The CoI model is a framework that is particularly relevant for analyzing the educational aspects of blog posts, especially in online learning platforms ( Kim and Gurvitch, 2020 ). CoI was initially developed as a conceptual framework to guide the practice of collaborative learning through asynchronous communication in online settings ( Garrison and Akyol, 2013 ; Shea et al., 2022 ). The origin of the CoI model is grounded in Vygotsky's theory of social development ( 1978 ) and Dewey's practical inquiry and critical thinking model ( 1933 ) ( Garrison and Akyol, 2013 ; Shea et al., 2022 ). The structure depicted in Figure 1 illustrates the three primary components (teaching, cognitive, and social presence) of CoI and their intersection, which are crucial for comprehending the dynamics of profound and significant online learning experiences ( Garrison et al., 2010a ). Subsequently, other research studies focused on collating data related to learning design as well as the evaluation process in the online learning experience to the cognitive dimension to identify and measure three constitutional components of the CoI framework, namely, social presence, teaching presence, and cognitive presence ( Garrison et al., 2010b ; Angeli and Schwartz, 2016 ).

Figure 1 . Community of Inquiry framework [adapted from Akyol and Garrison (2011) ].

Among the three elements of the CoI framework, the role of social presence has been investigated most extensively in online educational settings ( Garrison and Arbaugh, 2007 ). Research has claimed that social presence enhances the learner's satisfaction, while the internet is used as a medium to deliver education ( Cui et al., 2013 ). However, the positive social environments including affective expression, open discussion, and group cohesion lead toward a hidden curriculum of the technological aspects of distance or virtual education ( Moodley et al., 2022 ). In addition, Akyol and Garrison (2011) described cognitive presence as the extent to which learners can construct and confirm meaning through sustained reflection and discourse. Cognitive presence is considered a distinctive outcome of higher education since long rooted in Dewey's (1933) construction of practical inquiry and critical thinking ( Sadaf et al., 2021 ). Akyol and Garrison (2011) implemented cognitive presence in terms of a practical inquiry model and established a four-phase process including triggering, exploration, integration, and resolution in the context of educational settings. However, Marshall and Kostka (2020) emphasized the importance of teaching presence to ensure effective online learning rather than interactions among participants. Teaching presence has been conceptualized to comprise three components: instructional design and organization, facilitating discourse, and direct instruction. Several pieces of literature ( Chakraborty and Nafukho, 2015 ; Chakraborty, 2017 ; Bhatty, 2020 ) highlight the significance of teaching presence in online learning platforms to meet the needs of students, to ensure perceived learning, and to certify the sense of community.

Researchers were likely intrigued by the potential of blogs to foster a sense of community and social presence, which are essential elements of the CoI framework. The exploration of CoI in educational blogs is likely driven by a combination of theoretical considerations, gaps in current research, and practical implications. The research design was meticulously constructed to explicitly address these qualities and offer significant contributions to the field of online education.

3 Theoretical framework: Community of Inquiry (CoI) in educational blogs

Several researchers ( Pifarré et al., 2014 ; Jimoyiannis and Roussinos, 2017 ) have suggested the design of educational blogging activities applying the CoI model as an analysis framework considering students' engagement and presence. The primary approach underlying the design was to integrate an educational blog with both content space and discussion space. The content space encompasses blog posts, articles, multimedia elements, and other sources of information generated by the author or contributors. On the other hand, the discussion space refers to the section of the blog platform where readers and participants can actively participate in conversations, express opinions, ask questions, and offer feedback about the content presented in the content space. This design confirms the collaborative nature of the blog ( Jimoyiannis and Angelaina, 2012 ). Moreover, the CoI model determines indicators to recognize and measure each presence in an educational blog community. Basic components and indicators of CoI are presented in Table 1 considering educational blogs as a collaborative learning platform.

Table 1 . Indicators to recognize and measure each presence in an educational blog [modified from Garrison and Arbaugh (2007) ].

Table 1 provides a more explicit definition of CoI elements, using both indicators and instances. These characteristics have been employed to unambiguously ascertain social presence, cognitive presence, and instructional presence in a blog-assisted educational context. This mapping has been used in laying the groundwork for this research.

4 Methodology

4.1 research context.

Although technology-mediated learning has been introduced at the higher education level in Bangladesh in recent years ( Chowdhury et al., 2018 ), different online-based technologies have yet to be integrated into the curriculum and assessment process ( Arefin et al., 2023 ). In this study, the educational blog was created using Google Sites considering a project-based learning approach, which combines online and in-person instruction to enhance learning by offering guidance, resources, and feedback. The goal of this blog-based activity was to promote for blogs as additional resources in traditional teaching methods, with a focus on developing engaging and efficient instructional materials that are in line with specific learning objectives. This activity also aimed to foster collaborative learning and effective communication among students. However, there was no correlation between student involvement in the blog-based learning activity and the assessment process. Moreover, the curriculum did not provide any guidance on using alternative online platforms like blogs for instructional activities.

This study employed an exploratory sequential mixed-method approach. A convenience sampling method was employed to choose undergraduate students from Dhaka University for a 24-week blogging project. A total of 75 students enrolled in the “Introduction to Computer Course” of the B.Ed. program were invited to participate in this blog-based activities and were assessed on how collaborative learning opportunities contribute to the achievement of learning outcomes. A total of 65 students actively participated in collaborative blog discussions, contributing by uploading content and/or commenting to promote the discourse and reflection.

4.2 Data collection

This study collected both qualitative and quantitative data as part of an exploratory sequential mixed-method research design. Qualitative data were collected from the blogging activities of students and categorized into the following: content posts (e.g., text, image, audio, and video) and comments (e.g., questions, replies to or explanation of previous posts, and new notions). After completing a thorough analysis of the blog's activity, it was ascertained that there were 20 content postings and 71 comments made on the site during the research period. The low level of involvement can be ascribed to students' lack of familiarity with the blogging platform and the optional nature of their participation.

Furthermore, a semi-structured questionnaire, developed on existing research that used the CoI framework in online settings, was employed as an instrument to collect data from the students at the end of the semester to assess whether activities on educational blogs facilitate and contribute to students' learning. The participating students were required to assess quantitative items on a 5-point scale: (1 [strongly disagree], 2 [disagree], 3 [unsure], 4 [agree], and 5 [strongly agree]). They were also asked to provide qualitative responses in an open-text format, expressing their opinions on the effectiveness and challenges of educational blogs.

4.3 Data analysis

To address the first research question, qualitative data (content posts and comments) on the blog were segmented into meaningful units. A meaningful unit refers to a distinct and analyzable segment or component within a content post/comment on the blog. Each meaningful unit is segmented based on the specific characteristics related to cognitive, social, and teaching presence, as outlined in the CoI framework. Afterward, these meaningful data units were categorized according to 13 indicators associated with CoI elements (specified in Table 1 ). Both authors attempted to generate meaningful units from content posts and comments. To evaluate the consistency or agreement between the researchers while assessing the meaningful units, interrater reliability was measured ( Stemler, 2019 ). Subsequently, the researchers employed a consensus-building procedure to address and settle any differences, and this entailed collaborative evaluations of complex instances and deliberations to arrive at mutually acceptable decisions ( Stemler, 2019 ).

In the subsequent phase, students' responses were analyzed to address the second and third research questions. Quantitative data of students' responses were analyzed statistically using descriptive statistics methods (frequency, mean, and standard deviation), whereas qualitative data were analyzed thematically. The qualitative data about blog-based activities were integrated with the quantitative data concerning the students' perspective of blogging to have a more accurate comprehension of the research inquiries. Hence, the validity and reliability of the study were enhanced through cross-verification of results by using both qualitative and quantitative data.

4.4 Ethical consideration

Prior to participation as samples, the participants were provided with an informed consent form about the goal of the study. Subsequently, the participants provided written informed consent to ensure their complete understanding and enable them to make voluntary and well-informed decisions regarding their participation. This study used rigorous measures to guarantee absolute confidentiality and anonymity in both data collection and presentation, thereby safeguarding the privacy of the participants' data. There was no requirement for any type of student identification for the questionnaire. Moreover, the blog activities and analysis of blog publication did not need the use of individual student identities.

The findings were organized into three sections: students' engagement patterns on educational blogs, the impact of blog-based learning activities on students' learning, and the challenges associated with using educational blogs.

5.1 Nature of students' interaction in educational blogging

By converting each content posts and comments into distinct and significant components, a total of 100 meaningful units of units were found. In this specific study, the researchers reached a consensus on 90 out of 100 units, indicating a significant degree of interrater reliability. The results obtained by the researchers reveal a strong correlation across all sets of results, indicating a high level of interrater reliability for the test. Subsequently, after resolving the disagreements through a consensus, meaningful units were categorized in Table 2 according to the 13 indicators of the CoI model.

Table 2 . Blog's Community of Inquiry.

In Table 2 , the analysis of dissimilar proportions among three key presence factors—cognitive, social, and teaching—revealed significant variations. Cognitive presence dominated with 71%, surpassing both social presence (17%) and teaching presence (12%). The feeling of belonging enhanced social presence as individuals had a sense of connection to a collective with common interests and objectives. Within the cognitive domain, the aspect of exploration was prominent, accounting for 43% of the overall presence. Analyzing social presence revealed a fair distribution within this group. Teaching presence referred to a focus on the design and organization aspect, which accounts for 8% of this group. The comprehensive analysis of each category of presence offered a nuanced comprehension of the diverse factors influencing the CoI.

5.2 Blog-based learning activities to contribute and facilitate the way of students' learning

The following sections have highlighted students' responses regarding the blog-based experience.

5.2.1 Influencing factors of blogging experience in terms of perceived learning, community of practice and collaborative learning

The quantitative findings were categorized into perceived learning, community of practice, and collaborative learning and presented in the following sections:

• Perceived learning

It was revealed that students usually hold a favorable impression of using blogs for learning, exhibiting a strong consensus on statements pertaining to enjoyment, knowledge dissemination, and the efficacy of learning ( Table 3 ).

Table 3 . Perceived learning of blogs ( N = 65).

As given in Table 3 , 84.6% of students reported positive attitudes toward using blogs for educational purposes, with a mean score of 3.97 indicating a moderately positive perception and a low level of variability with a standard deviation of 0.59. Similarly, 81.5% of students derived enjoyment from reading and acquiring knowledge from publications on the blog. A significant majority (89.1%) hold the belief that blog conversations are beneficial for exchanging information and expertise with peers. However, a variation in the reactions to accessing the blog more than required was observed, with a significant number of students expressing a neutral position. The average score (M = 2.97) indicated a neutral-to-slightly negative sentiment, and there is a significant range of responses (SD = 0.98). In addition, 89.1% of students strongly asserted that using the blog has facilitated their learning, demonstrating a constant and favorable influence on their educational experience.

• Community of practice

Table 4 illustrated that students perceived positive perceptions of the impact of blog posts on enhanced connectivity, heightened motivation, and greater interaction.

Table 4 . Blogs as a community of practice ( N = 65).

As given in Table 4 , approximately 70.3% of students reported feeling connected when using the blog, suggesting a favorable emotional attachment to the learning environment. The data indicated that a substantial number of students (75.4%) demonstrated a desire to engage with supplementary materials pertaining to the issues mentioned on the blog. This pointed out that the blog can serve as an effective catalyst for encouraging further investigation and study. Approximately 70.4% of students hold the belief that the blog has a role in enhancing the interaction, promoting a feeling of involvement and cooperation within the learning community.

• Collaborative learning

Table 5 demonstrated that the data suggest favorable perceptions regarding the influence of blog posts on the enhancement of skills and the promotion of collaborative learning.

Table 5 . Collaborative learning through blogs ( N = 65).

Approximately 79.7% of students concurred that publications (posts/comments) from peers have been beneficial in enhancing their abilities and knowledge. Likewise, a significant majority of students (75.1%) held the belief that blogging enhances collaborative learning among their peers. Nevertheless, opinions differed regarding the idea that collaborative learning is time-consuming; 36.7% of individuals agreed, while 31.3% remained neutral. The average score was somewhat negative (M = 3.05), and there was a considerable degree of heterogeneity in the replies (SD = 1.06).

• Scale statistics

It was found that students preferred blogs as beneficial for perceived learning use (M = 19.00, SD = 2.078) in comparison to community of practice (M = 11.29, SD = 1.670) and collaborative learning platform (M = 10.63, SD = 1.386). In aggregation, positive experiences were revealed to continue teaching-learning practices using blogs among students ( Table 6 ).

Table 6 . Scale statistics ( N = 65).

5.2.2 Impact of blogging activities on learning experience

The following sections emphasized students' perception of the impact that blog-based learning activities had on their learning experience.

• Flexibility

It was found that more than 75% of the students have mentioned that it is convenient as blogs are easy to access and flexible in timing based on their personal preference even in leisure. However, some of them were worried about the availability of the internet. According to Student 1 ,

“ I can access blog 24/7 anywhere.”

Approximately two-thirds of the students mentioned that blogs give them an opportunity to share learning resources and access different thoughts of a community as well as to develop understanding. Some other students' responses are mentioned below:

“ People learn from reading the comments of different respondents.” (Student 2)     “ Blog helps to develop understanding.” ( Student 3)     “ Blog helps us to know thought of others.” ( Student 4)

Few students mentioned that blogs were a new way of learning collectively and are very fun and interactive. According to Student 5 ,

“ I think it is new way of learning collectively.”

• Feedback

Around half of the students mentioned that they can express themselves through writing, and at the same time, the feedback helps them be motivated as well as accumulate self-confidence. A few of the students reported that they were able to learn many new things through using blogs. According to Student 6 ,

“ Blog makes us confident as it creates opportunities to learn new things.”

• Motivation

Students also demonstrated favorable attitudes toward emotions of connection, motivation for further reading, and apparent enhancement in engagement when using the blog ( Table 4 ).

• Virtual learning communities

Nearly half of the students concurred that blogs had the potential to foster the development of virtual learning communities, facilitating student connectivity, the exchange of experiences, and the provision of mutual support. According to Student 7 ,

“ Blog promotes discussion.”

• Empowerment

Some of the students expressed the view that blogging enables students to assert their thoughts, communicate their viewpoints, and participate in discussions, hence fostering a sense of ownership in their learning experience. According to Student 8 ,

“ As blogs have different people with different perspectives, and I have personally found many thought-provoking ideas in different blogs.”

• Access to resources

A number of students contended that blogs could function as a means for disseminating knowledge, references, and supplementary content, thereby offering benefits to students.

5.3 Challenges of using educational blog

While educational blogs offered numerous benefits, there were also challenges associated with their use in the context of developing countries such as Bangladesh. The subsequent sections delineated several obstacles reported by the students during their use of educational blogs in this study:

• Unfamiliarity of blog

Several students expressed a lack of proficiency in using blogs, which impedes their capacity to successfully explore and use instructional blogs. According to Student 9 ,

“ The problem is that blogs are still unfamiliar.”

• Limited internet access

The majority of the students reported that limited and unreliable access to the internet can hinder the students' ability to participate in blog-based activities. According to Student 10 ,

“ Blogging activity needs internet, and internet is not available everywhere.”

• Limited access to device

The study revealed that several students do not have personal devices such as laptops or smartphones, which presents a difficulty for their involvement in blog activities that require digital interaction. This has the potential to create a digital divide, which could impact the equity of educational opportunities.

• Decreased socialization

It was found that blog users sometimes absorb information alone, not actively participating in social interactions. Furthermore, a few students indicated that, unlike face-to-face contacts, blogs may lack personal connection, resulting in a decreased sense of socialization. According to Student 11 ,

“ It can reduce the tendency of reading the contents carefully and reduce in-person interactions with people.”

6 Discussion

This study has demonstrated that the integration of cognitive, social, and teaching presence is necessary for meaningful learning in online platforms. The results of this investigation are consistent with the conclusions of a prior study ( Fiock, 2020 ). In addition, this study has confirmed that cognitive presence is highly observed in blogging activities, which is similar to the findings of a previous research ( Liu et al., 2022 ). On the contrary, several studies ( Garrison, 2007 ; Galikyan and Admiraal, 2019 ) have found difficulties to move toward higher cognitive and inquiry levels in asynchronous online discussions. This study has confirmed that teaching presence is the least observed in blogging activities, which is similar to the findings of previous research ( Angelaina and Jimoyiannis, 2011 ), where they reported that teaching presence is anticipated to be less tangible in blogging activities while analyzing students' posts using the CoI framework, and it cannot be assumed that all students will actively engage with and read the instructor's posts.

In addition, the majority of the students affirmed that they enjoyed using blogs as a learning tool and have been facilitated through blogs to share knowledge and experience with peers. Furthermore, they added that the presence of conducive academic environments for collaborative learning has spurred their inclination to explore relevant supplementary resources. Similarly, Bener and Yildiz (2019) found blogs as a reflective platform where participants can actively deliberate their thoughts about the topics discussed in the blogs. Students have also uttered that blogging leads toward effective collaboration by creating opportunities for diverse perspectives, which reflects the research outcome of a previous study ( Zawilinski, 2012 ).

The current study indicated that blogs are not familiar enough to the students and that ~15% of them are not interested in posting publications. In addition, approximately one-third of the students were found inattentive to take the maximum advantages of collaboration and feedback due to a lack of technological competency. However, Amichai-Hamburger et al. (2016) noted that individuals who only engage in reading rather than not interested in participating in online discussion may still get the opportunity to learn through passive or indirect participation. In addition, this study revealed that students need clear guidelines, argumentative posts, and constant feedback to optimize learning outcomes in the blogging environment. Similar issues have been mentioned by other research also ( Hansen, 2016 ). This study has revealed that providing constructive feedback can effectively steer students toward enhancing their level of engagement and the quality of their contributions. Additionally, Pifarré et al. (2014) used an exploratory sequential multi-method approach to investigate a blogging project in a secondary class and found that collaborative learning as well as a sense of community were important factors in predicting perceived learning in an online setting. The results of their research align with the results of this study. Hence, it is evident that a supportive community can inspire students to actively participate in the blogging environment and have a sense of belonging. Furthermore, one-third of the students worried about the unfamiliarity and technical difficulties of using blogs. It is to be noted here that this research did not provide any training on blogging. Farmer et al. (2008) emphasized conducting a fully scaffold lab session for ensuring enhanced accessibility as well as providing adequate technical support.

7 Recommendations

This study suggests the following recommendations to leverage students' engagement as well as to enhance learning outcomes through blogging activities:

• Establishing monitoring system: It is recommended to establish a monitoring system to detect the students who may be encountering difficulties with technology or experiencing a lack of involvement.

• Offering training, guidelines, and mentorship: It is imperative to establish comprehensive training programs that focus on technical competency for students, aiming to improve their proficiency in using online platforms. Explicit guidelines or online modules might aid students in comprehending the specific requirements, minimizing ambiguity, and augmenting their capacity to engage actively. Furthermore, offering supplementary aid through individualized guidance, peer mentorship, or supplementary materials can assist these students in surmounting barriers and engaging effectively.

• Fostering open communication: It is suggested to foster a positive environment that encourages students to freely voice their viewpoints, inquire, and engage with their peers, which can serve as a beneficial stimulus to promote active participation.

• Accommodating diverse learning preference: It recommended to focus on designing learning activities that accommodate different diverse learning preferences of the students, guaranteeing that both engaged and unengaged participants can benefit from the blogging platform.

• Redesigning curriculum: It is recommended to synchronize the use of educational blogs with the formal curriculum, guaranteeing that blog activities supplement and improve conventional teaching techniques.

• Redesigning assessment process: It is recommended to establish explicit assessment methods for blog-related tasks, ensuring they are in line with the goals of the course. This study suggests the design of collaborative projects that leverage the interactive features of blogs. Assignments that require group discussions, collaborative projects, or peer evaluations on the blogging platform can enhance collaborative learning and offer exposure to a wide range of ideas.

• Creating awareness: As a social media tool, blogs are still underrated and underutilized, so awareness needs to be created focusing on the impact of blogs to enhance teaching and learning practices.

8 Conclusion

Despite that most of the students were unfamiliar with using blogs, they showed enhanced enthusiasm to participate in the blog activities to boost online learning through posting content and resources, discussing ideas, making queries, and so on. Students' participation in educational blogging practices is characterized by asynchronous collaboration, information exchange, reflection, and constructive feedback. Engaging in a wider dialogue and receiving feedback frequently result in a stronger sense of personal responsibility for one's own learning. Using a blended learning philosophy, well-designed blogs can encompass the students' learning arena beyond the classroom boundaries by combining different approaches to learning. Overall, the findings of this study indicate that blogs are perceived by students as an effective collaborative learning tool. Hence, stakeholders and curriculum developers may emphasize aligning this tool with the existing curriculum to maximize and leverage the potential benefits of blogging. The small sample size and exploratory nature of the study are the major limitations of this study. Further research may be conducted to assess student perception with a larger study group to get a detailed idea about how blogs andragogically or pedagogically can be used to support the creation of a CoI framework that could lead to meaningful and collaborative learning.

Data availability statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

Ethics statement

Ethical approval was not required for the study involving human participants in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. Written informed consent was obtained from the individuals for participation in the study and for the publication of any potentially identifiable images or data included in this article.

Author contributions

SC: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Software, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. MS: Conceptualization, Methodology, Project administration, Supervision, Validation, Writing – review & editing.

The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher's note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Akyol, Z., and Garrison, D. R. (2011). Understanding cognitive presence in an online and blended community of inquiry: assessing outcomes and processes for deep approaches to learning. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 42, 233–250. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.01029.x

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Amichai-Hamburger, Y., Gazit, T., Bar-Ilan, J., Perez, O., Aharony, N., Bronstein, J., et al. (2016). Psychological factors behind the lack of participation in online discussions. Comput. Human Behav. 55, 268–277. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.09.009

Angelaina, S., and Jimoyiannis, A. (2011). “Educational blogging: Developing and investigating a students' community of inquiry,” in Research on e-Learning and ICT in Education (Cham: Springer).

Google Scholar

Angeli, C., and Schwartz, N. H. (2016). Differences in electronic exchanges in synchronous and asynchronous computer-mediated communication: the effect of culture as a mediating variable. Interact. Learn. Environ. 24, 1109–1130. doi: 10.1080/10494820.2014.961484

Arefin, A. S., Chowdhury, S. A., Roy, R. C., Rahaman, M. M., and Cross, B. (2023). Education system in Bangladesh amid COVID-19: traditional scenario, emergency protocols, challenges and a proposed sustainable conceptual framework. Sustainability 15, 8126. doi: 10.3390/su15108126

Bener, E., and Yildiz, S. (2019). The use of blog activities to promote reflection in an ELT practicum. Aust. J. Teach. Educ . 44, 38–56. doi: 10.14221/ajte.2019v44n8.3

Bhatty, M. A. (2020). Impact of Teaching Presence on Learning Outcomes. A Qualitative Study of Perceptions Through the Lens of Online Teachers . Moon Township, PA: Robert Morris University.

Bower, M. (2017). Design of Technology-Enhanced Learning: Integrating Research and Practice . Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited.

Cameron, D., and Anderson, T. (2006). Comparing weblogs to threaded discussion tools in online educational contexts. Int. J. Instruct. Technol. Dist. Learn. (ITDL) 2006, 3.

Chakraborty, M. (2017). Learner engagement strategies in online class environment (Doctoral dissertation). Texas A & M University, United States.

Chakraborty, M., and Nafukho, F. M. (2015). Strategies for virtual learning environments: Focusing on teaching presence and teaching immediacy. J. Online Learn. Res. Pract. 4. doi: 10.18278/il.4.1.1

Chowdhury, S. A., Arefin, S., and Rahaman, M. M. (2018). Impacts of ICT integration in the higher education classrooms: Bangladesh perspective. J. Educ. pract. 9, 82−86.

Cui, G., Lockee, B., and Meng, C. (2013). Building modern online social presence: a review of social presence theory and its instructional design implications for future trends. Educ. Informat. Technol. 18, 661–685. doi: 10.1007/s10639-012-9192-1

Dewey, J. (1933). How We Think. A Restatement of the Relation of Reflective Thinking to the Educative Process . D.C. Heath and Company.

Farmer, B., Yue, A., and Brooks, C. (2008). Using blogging for higher order learning in large cohort university teaching: a case study. Austral. J. Educ. Technol . 24. doi: 10.14742/ajet.1215

Fiock, H. (2020). Designing a community of inquiry in online courses. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn. 21, 135–153. doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v20i5.3985

Galikyan, I., and Admiraal, W. (2019). Students' engagement in asynchronous online discussion: the relationship between cognitive presence, learner prominence, and academic performance. Intern. Higher Educ. 43, 100692. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2019.100692

Garrison, D. R. (2007). Online community of inquiry review: social, cognitive, and teaching presence issues. J. Asynchronous Learn. Netw. 11, 61–72. doi: 10.24059/olj.v11i1.1737

Garrison, D. R. (2020). CoI Emergence and Influence . Bronx: The Community of Inquiry.

Garrison, D. R., and Akyol, Z. (2013). The community of inquiry theoretical framework. Handb. Dist. Educ. 3, 104–120. doi: 10.4324/9780203803738.ch7

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., and Archer, W. (2010a). The first decade of the community of inquiry framework: a retrospective. Intern. Higher Educ. 13, 5–9. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.003

Garrison, D. R., and Arbaugh, J. B. (2007). Researching the community of inquiry framework: Review, issues, and future directions. Intern. Higher Educ. 10, 157–172. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2007.04.001

Garrison, D. R., Cleveland-Innes, M., and Fung, T. S. (2010b). Exploring causal relationships among teaching, cognitive and social presence: student perceptions of the community of inquiry framework. Intern. Higher Educ. 13, 31–36. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.002

Hansen, H. E. (2016). The impact of blog-style writing on student learning outcomes: a pilot study. J. Polit. Sci. Educ. 12, 85–101. doi: 10.1080/15512169.2015.1060887

Ifinedo, P. (2017). Students' perceived impact of learning and satisfaction with blogs. Int. J. Informat. Learn. Technol. 34, 322–337. doi: 10.1108/IJILT-12-2016-0059

Jimoyiannis, A., and Angelaina, S. (2012). Towards an analysis framework for investigating students' engagement and learning in educational blogs. J. Comp. Assist. Learn. 28, 222–234. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00467.x

Jimoyiannis, A., and Roussinos, D. (2017). Students' collaborative patterns in a wiki-authoring project: towards a theoretical and analysis framework. J. Appl. Res. Higher Educ. 9, 24–39. doi: 10.1108/JARHE-05-2016-0034

Jimoyiannis, A., Tsiotakis, P., and Roussinos, D. (2012). “Blogs in higher education: analysing students' participation and presence in a community of blogging,” in Proceedings of the IADIS International Conference e-Learning 2012 (Lisbon).

Kaçar, I. G. (2021). “Interpersonal dimensions of EFL pre-service teachers' blog discourse from the perspective of the systemic functional linguistics,” in Challenge, Create, Innovate: Voices of ELT Professionals from the Virtual Classroom . Paris: Livre de Lyon.

Kaul, M., Aksela, M., and Wu, X. (2018). Dynamics of the community of inquiry (CoI) within a massive open online course (MOOC) for in-service teachers in environmental education. Educ. Sci. 8, 40. doi: 10.3390/educsci8020040

Kaya, S., Özgür, A. Z., and Koçak, N. G. (2012). “Integrating social media into distance learning,” in 4th International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies (Barcelona).

Kerawalla, L., Minocha, S., Kirkup, G., and Conole, G. (2009). An empirically grounded framework to guide blogging in higher education. J. Comp. Assist. Learn. 25, 31–42. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2008.00286.x

Kim, G.-C., and Gurvitch, R. (2020). Online education research adopting the community of inquiry framework: a systematic review. Quest 72, 395–409. doi: 10.1080/00336297.2020.1761843

Lawrence, E., Sides, J., and Farrell, H. (2010). Self-segregation or deliberation? Blog readership, participation, and polarization in American politics. Perspect Polit. 8, 141–157. doi: 10.1017/S1537592709992714

Liu, B., Xing, W., Zeng, Y., and Wu, Y. (2022). Linking cognitive processes and learning outcomes: The influence of cognitive presence on learning performance in MOOCs. Br. J. Educat. Technol. 53, 1459–1477. doi: 10.1111/bjet.13193

Marshall, H. W., and Kostka, I. (2020). Fostering teaching presence through the synchronous online flipped learning approach. Tesl-Ej 24, n2.

Milad, M. (2017). Blended learning approach: integrating reading and writing research skills to improve academic writing. Arab J. Appl. Linguist. 3, 23–55.

Moodley, K., Van Wyk, M., Robberts, A., and Wolff, E. (2022). Exploring the education experience in online learning. Int. J. Educ. Dev. Using Inf. Commun. Technol. 18, 146–163.

Petit, M., Babin, J., and Desrochers, M.-È. (2023). Remote supervision of teacher trainee internships: Using digital technology to increase social presence. Front. Educ. 7, 1026417. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2022.1026417

Pifarré, M., Guijosa, A., and Argelagós, E. (2014). Using a blog to create and support a community of inquiry in secondary education. E-Learn. Digit. Media 11, 72–87. doi: 10.2304/elea.2014.11.1.72

Sadaf, A., Wu, T., and Martin, F. (2021). Cognitive presence in online learning: a systematic review of empirical research from 2000 to 2019. Comp. Educ. Open 2, 100050. doi: 10.1016/j.caeo.2021.100050

Seaman, J. E., Allen, I. E., and Seaman, J. (2018). Grade Increase: Tracking Distance Education in the United States. Babson Park, MA: Babson Survey Research Group.

Shea, P., Richardson, J., and Swan, K. (2022). Building bridges to advance the community of inquiry framework for online learning. Educ. Psychol. 57, 148–161. doi: 10.1080/00461520.2022.2089989

Song, D., and Bonk, C. J. (2016). Motivational factors in self-directed informal learning from online learning resources. Cogent Educ. 3, 1205838. doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2016.1205838

Stemler, S. E. (2019). A comparison of consensus, consistency, and measurement approaches to estimating interrater reliability. Pract. Assess. Res. Eval . 9:4. doi: 10.7275/96jp-xz07

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in Society. The Development of Higher Psychological Processes . Harvard University Press.

Zawilinski, L. M. (2012). An Exploration of a Collaborative Blogging Approach to Literacy and Learning: A Mixed Methods Study . Stamford: University of Connecticut.

Keywords: web 2.0, Community of Inquiry (CoI), blog, collaborative learning, learning outcome

Citation: Chowdhury SA and Siddique MNA (2024) Developing a Community of Inquiry using an educational blog in higher education from the perspective of Bangladesh. Front. Educ. 9:1302434. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2024.1302434

Received: 26 September 2023; Accepted: 25 March 2024; Published: 09 April 2024.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2024 Chowdhury and Siddique. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Sabbir Ahmed Chowdhury, sabbir.ahmed@du.ac.bd

This article is part of the Research Topic

Psychological Transformation in Technology-Enhanced Learning Environments (TELEs): Focus on Teachers and Learners