Learning in a Hybrid Classroom Environment: Students’ Opinions and Preferences

Background/purpose. This study aims to determine the preferences and opinions of University of Sharjah students about hybrid learning, taking into account its increasing use globally, especially during and after the pandemic.

Materials/methods. Participants were invited to complete a voluntary web-based questionnaire (Google Form), which was distributed online during the second semester of the 2023–2024 academic year. The initial sample included 450 UOS students. However, only 400 completed the questionnaire, leading to a response rate of 89%. Descriptive analysis and multiple regressions were conducted on data collected from 400 undergraduate students from different majors at the University of Sharjah. Participants had to voluntarily answer an online self-survey questionnaire.

Results. The results revealed positive and negative opinions of students regarding hybrid learning, indicating that although students preferred face-to-face and hybrid learning, they had a stronger preference for face-to-face education, especially when it requires direct interaction, as well as during assessments. The results reflect a clear influence of specialization and year of study, as well as place and type of residence on students’ preferences and opinions.

Conclusion. The results indicate the need to improve hybrid learning by addressing communication and direct interaction issues, activating the human element in the learning process, and improving the level of technology training for teachers and learners.

Keywords: Hybrid learning, opinions, preferences, interaction, quality of education

References

Bower, M., Dalgarno, B., Kennedy, G. E., Lee, M. J., Kenney, J. (2015). Design and implementation factors in blended synchronous learning environments: Outcomes from a cross-case analysis. Computers & Education, 86, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.03.006.

Butz, N. T., Stupnisky, R. H. (2016). A mixed methods study of graduate students’ self-determined motivation in synchronous hybrid learning environments. The Internet and Higher Education, 28, 85–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.10.003.

Blankson, J., Kyei-Blankson, L. (2008, March). Preservice Teacher Technology Preparation Program That Counts: How to Prepare Candidates to Attain ISTE NETS. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 3682-3689). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).

Cimermanová, I. (2018). The effect of learning styles on academic achievement in different forms of teaching. International Journal of Instruction, 11(3), 219–232. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11316a.

Diseth, A. (2013). Personality as an indirect predictor of academic achievement via student course experience and approach to learning. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 41(8), 1297–1308. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2013.41.8.1297.

Debattista, M. (2018). A comprehensive rubric for instructional design in e-learning. International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 35(2), 93–104.

https://doi.org/10.1108/IJILT-09-2017-0092.

Du, L., Zhao, L., Xu, T., Wang, Y., Zu, W., Huang, X., Nie, W., Wang, L. (2022). Blended learning vs traditional teaching: The potential of a novel teaching strategy in nursing education- a systematic review and meta-analysis. Nurse Education in Practice, 63, 103354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2022.103354.

Dziuban, C. D., Hartman, J. L., Moskal, P. D. (2004). Blended learning. Educause Research Bulletin, 7, 2–12.

EU, European Union, 2020. Digital Education Action Plan 2021–2027 Resetting Education and Training for the Digital Age. Available at : https://eur-lex. europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52020DC0624.

Finlay, M. J., Tinnion, D. J., Simpson, T. (2022). A virtual versus blended learning approach to higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic: The experiences of a sport and exercise science student cohort. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism education, 30, 100363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhlste.2021.100363.

Fleming, N. (1995). I'm different; not dumb. Modes of presentation (VARK) in the tertiary classroom. Proceedings of the 1995 Annual Conference of the Higher Education and Research Development Society of Australasia (pp. 308-313). Queensland: HERDSA.

Garnham, C., Kaleta, R. (2002). Introduction to Hybrid Courses. Teaching with Technology Today, (8) 6. University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. Retrieved September 22, 2009 from http://www.uwsa.edu/ttt/articles/garnham.htm.

He, L., Yang, N., Xu, L., Ping, F., Li, W., Sun, Q., Li, Y., Zhu, H., Zhang, H. (2020). Synchronous distance education vs traditional education for health science student: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Medical Education, 55(3), 293–308. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.14364.

Iqbal, S. A., Ashiq, M., Rehman, S.U., Rashid, S., Tayyab, N. (2022). Students’ perceptions and experiences of online education in Pakistani universities and higher education institutes during COVID-19. Education Sciences, 12(3), 166. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12030166

Karatay, Y. (2016). An Investigation on Multimedia Language Laboratory in Turkish State Universities. İhsan Doğramacı Bilkent University, Graduate School of Education, Unpublished Master’s Thesis. http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.33023.84643.

Khan, M., Vivek, A., Nabi, M., Khojah, M., Tahir, M. (2021). Students' perception towards learning during COVID-19 pandemic in India: An empirical study. Sustainability, 13(1), 57. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su13010057.

Lakhal, S., Mukamurera, J., B´edard, M., Heilporn, G., Chauret, M. (2021). Students and instructorsʼ perspective on blended synchronous learning in a Canadian graduate program. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 37(5), 1383–1396. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12578.

Lakhal, S., Mukamurera, J., B´edard, M., Heilporn, G., Chauret, M. (2020). Features fostering academic and social integration in blended synchronous courses in graduate programs. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17(5). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-0180-z.

Lim, D. H., Morris, M. L. (2009). Learner and instructional factors influencing learning outcomes within a blended learning environment. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 12(4), 282–293. http://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.12.4.282.

López-Pérez, M. V., Pérez-López, M. C., Rodríguez-Ariza, L. (2011). Blended learning in higher education: Students’ perceptions and their relation to outcomes. Computers & Education, 56(3), 818–826. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.10.023. Washington DC: US Department of Education.

Li, D. (2022). The shift to online classes during the COVID-19 pandemic: Benefits, challenges, and required improvements from the students’ perspective. The Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 20(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.34190/ejel.20.1.2106.

Lee, I. C. J., Wong, P., Goh, S. P. L., & Cook, S. (2022). A synchronous hybrid team-based learning class: why and how to do it? Medical Science Educator, 32, 697-702. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-022-01538-5

Ma, P., Lee, C. S. (2021). Evaluating the effectiveness of blended learning using the ARCS model. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 37(5), 1397–1408. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12579.

Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., Jones, K. (2010). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies.

Norberg, A., Dziuban, C. D., Moskal, P. D. (2011). A time‐based blended learning model. On the Horizon, 19(3), 207–216. https://doi.org/10.1108/10748121111163913.

Nikolopoulou, K. (2022). University students’ online learning experiences in context of COVID-19: Study in Greece. Educational Innovation and Emerging Technologies, 2(2), 17–27.

O'Toole, J. M., Absalom. D. J. (2003). The impact of blended learning on student outcomes: Is there room on the horse for two? Journal of Educational Media, 28(2–3), 179–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/1358165032000165680.

OECD, Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, 2022. Education Policy Outlook 2022. Available from: https://www.oecd.org/education/education-p olicy-outlook-4cf5b585-en.htm.

Promsurin, S., Vitayapirak, J. (2015). Comparison of e-learning blended and traditional English teaching methods: A case study of Ban Hong community education college. International Journal of Languages, Literature and Linguistics, 1(2), 80–86. https://doi.org/10.7763/IJLLL.2015.V1.17.

Paudel, P. (2021). Online education: Benefits, challenges and strategies during and after COVID-19 in higher education. International Journal on Studies in Education (IJonSE), 3(2), 70-85.

Pongkendek, J. J., Ahmar, D. S., Munandar, H., & Azzajjad, M. F. (2021). Student perceptions of online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. EduLine: Journal of Education and Learning Innovation, 2(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.35877/ 454RI.eduline607

Raes, A., Detienne, L., Windey, I., Depaepe, F. (2020). A systematic literature review on synchronous hybrid learning: Gaps identified. Learning Environments Research, 23(3), 269–290. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-019-09303-z.

Saichaie, K. (2020). Blended, flipped, and hybrid learning: Definitions, developments, and directions. New Directions for Teaching & Learning, (164), 95–104. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.20428.

Stewart, W., & Lowenthal, P. (2021). Experiences and perceptions of exchange students learning online during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Republic of Korea: An exploratory descriptive study. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 16(1), 119-140. Retrieved from https://www.asianjde.com/ojs/index.php/AsianJDE/article/view/551

Tang, C. M., Chaw, L.Y. (2013). Readiness for blended learning: Understanding attitude of university students. International Journal of Cyber Society and Education, 6(2), 79–100. READINESS FOR BLENDED LEARNING: UNDERSTANDING ATTITUDE OF UNIVERSITY STUDENTS - Learning & Technology Library (LearnTechLib)

Vital López, L., Zamora-Antuñano, M. A., Cruz-Pérez, M. A., Rodríguez Reséndíz, J., Fuentes Ramírez, F., Paredes García, W. J., Rodríguez Reséndiz, H., Cruz Ramírez, M., García García, R. (2022). The impacts of COVID-19 on technological and polytechnic university students in Mexico. Sustainability, 14(10), 6087. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14106087.

Wang, Q., Huang, C. (2018). Pedagogical, social and technical designs of a blended synchronous learning environment. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49(3), 451–462. https:// doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12558.

Wang, Q., Huang, C., Quek, C.L. (2018). Students’ perspectives on the design and implementation of a blended synchronous learning environment. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 34(1), 1–13. Students’ perspectives on the design and implementation of a blended synchronous learning environment | Australasian Journal of Educational Technology

Zagkos, C., Kyridis, A., Kamarianos, I., Dragouni, Κ. E., Katsanou, A., Kouroumichaki, E., Papastergiou, N., Stergianopoulos, E. (2022). Emergency remote teaching and learning in Greek universities during the COVID-19 pandemic: The attitudes of university students. European Journal of Interactive Multimedia and Education, 3(1), e02207. https://doi.org/10.30935/ejimed/11494.

Zhang, K., Wu, S., Xu, Y., Cao, W., Goetz, T., Parks-Stamm, E. (2021). Adaptability promotes student engagement under COVID-19: The multiple mediating effects of academic emotion. Frontiers In Psychology, 11, 633265. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.633265.

Zydney, J. M., McKimmy, P., Lindberg, R., Schmidt, M. (2019). Here or there instruction: Lessons learned in implementing innovative approaches to blended synchronous learning. TechTrends, 63(2), 123–132. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-018-0344-z.

Zapata-Cuervo, N., Montes-Guerra, M. I., Shin, H. H., Jeong, M., & Cho, M. H. (2023). Students’ psychological perceptions toward online learning engagement and outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic: A comparative analysis of students in three different countries. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education, 35(2), 108–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/10963758.2021.1907195

Announcement

EDUPIJ Citation Metrics

EDUPIJ News!

► Educational Process International Journal has changed to publish in article number order instead of in page range order beginning with Volume 14 (2025).