Evaluation of blended learning effectiveness by students of different academic programmes


Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

As modern universities actively use various models of blended learning that combine traditional and digital learning technologies, it seems necessary to find their optimal integration and develop appropriate criteria for assessing the effectiveness of such integration in achieving educational objectives. The research is aimed at identifying trends and searching for reasons for the efficient, optimal or inefficient use of educational technologies when organizing the learning process in Russian universities in a blended format. The paper presents the results of the analysis of student assessments of the efficiency of the blended learning technologies (BLT) based on the unique system of criteria and methods introduced by the authors to study such efficiency. The main research method used was a survey in which 295 students took part from various academic programmes of St. Petersburg State University and Northern (Arctic) Federal University. Respondents were asked to evaluate the efficiency of BLT according to the effective, didactic and resource criteria. Based on statistical data processing, the following conclusions are drawn: students evaluate the employed BLT as optimal; readiness and interest of teachers (according to students) in creating comfortable and favorable conditions for blended learning is quite high, despite the existing difficulties in organization and technical maintenance of the equipment at the university level. At the same time, the survey revealed heterogeneity in the assessment of each criterion and determined differences in the assessments given by the students from different academic programmes.

About the authors

Nina Valentinovna Bordovskaia

St. Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg

Email: n.bordovskaja@spbu.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4425-6326

Academician of the Russian Academy of Education, Doctor of Sciences (Education), Professor, Head of Chair of Educational Psychology and Pedagogy

Russian Federation

Elena Anatolievna Koshkina

Lomonosov Northern (Arctic) Federal University, Arkhangelsk

Email: coschkina.el@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-1590-1752

Doctor of Sciences (Education), Associate Professor, Professor of Chair of Pedagogy and Psychology, Institute of the Humanities

Russian Federation

Marina Anatolievna Tikhomirova

St. Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg

Author for correspondence.
Email: tikhomarina@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-5940-8367

PhD (Psychology), assistant professor of Chair of Educational Psychology and Pedagogy

Russian Federation

Maria Pavlovna Iskhakova

St. Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg

Email: iskhakova.mp1998@gmail.com

postgraduate student

Russian Federation

References

  1. Marcial D.E., Habalo D.P. Success level of a hybrid training in teacher education: experiences in a developing country. Informatsionnye tekhnologii i sredstva obucheniya, 2017, vol. 62, no. 6, pp. 140–150. EDN: ZXWVDF.
  2. Bobrova S.E. Current challenges of blended learning in higher education. Mir nauki, kultury, obrazovaniya, 2020, no. 4, pp. 192–193. doi: 10.24411/1991-5497-2020-00726.
  3. Guro-Frolova Yu.R. Professional and sociocultural competences developing during module teaching. Aktualnye problemy gumanitarnykh i sotsialno-ekonomicheskikh nauk, 2015, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 26–28. EDN: UOGMRZ.
  4. Bryksina O.F. Management aspects of blended learning implementation in an educational organization: the main problems and ways to solve them. Samarskiy nauchnyy vestnik, 2021, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 228–233. doi: 10.17816/snv2021102301.
  5. Borshcheva O.V. Pedagogical conditions of blended learning effectiveness in teaching a foreign language in a non-language university. Pedagogika i psikhologiya obrazovaniya, 2020, no. 4, pp. 72–80. doi: 10.31862/2500-297X-2020-4-72-8.
  6. Vasileva L.N., Gorbunova V.I., Timofeeva N.N. The educational conditions for implementing blended learning of the students of technical bachelor’s degree programs. Vektor nauki Tolyattinskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: Pedagogika, psikhologiya, 2018, no. 4, pp. 9–14. doi: 10.18323/2221-5662-2018-4-9-14.
  7. Karavanov A.A., Ustinov I.Yu. The main criteria for the effectiveness of pedagogical systems. Territoriya nauki, 2014, no. 5, pp. 23–28. EDN: TJDIZF.
  8. Manyakhina V.G. Conditions for blended learning effectiveness. Nauka i shkola, 2022, no. 5, pp. 107–120. doi: 10.31862/1819-463X-2022-5-107-120.
  9. Kruchinin M.V., Kruchinina G.A., Sedov D.S., Sorokin I.A. Traditional and digital learning technologies in assessment of the higher school students. Chelovek i obrazovanie, 2020, no. 3, pp. 55–61. doi: 10.54884/S181570410020888-1.
  10. Khristidis T.V. Technology of “mixed learning” (blended learning) in the professional training of students at the university. Vestnik Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta kultury i iskusstv, 2022, no. 6, pp. 50–56. doi: 10.24412/1997-0803-2022-6110-50-56.
  11. Margolis A.A., Sorokova M.G., Shvedovskaya A.A. Face-to-face, blended or online: how do students prefer to study? Psikhologicheskaya nauka i obrazovanie, 2022, vol. 27, no. 5, pp. 5–20. doi: 10.17759/pse.2022270501.
  12. Sorokova M.G. Digital educational environment in university: who is more comfortable studying in it? Psikhologicheskaya nauka i obrazovanie, 2020, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 44–58. doi: 10.17759/pse.2020250204.
  13. Sorokova M.G. E-course as blended learning digital educational resource in university. Psikhologicheskaya nauka i obrazovanie, 2020, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 36–50. doi: 10.17759/pse.2020250104.
  14. Golovanova I.I., Alipichev A.Yu., Ayupov T.A. et al. Digital educational environment and online learning format through the lens of students: pros and cons. Obrazovanie i Samorazvitie, 2022, no. 3, pp. 202–221. doi: 10.26907/esd.17.3.16.
  15. Kyaw B.M., Posadzki P., Paddock S., Car J., Campbell J., Tudor C.L. Effectiveness of digital education on communication skills among medical students: Systematic review and meta-analysis by the Digital Health Education Collaboration. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 2019, vol. 21, no. 8, article number e12967. doi: 10.2196/12967.
  16. Yunusa A.A., Umar I.N. A scoping review of Critical Predictive Factors (CPFs) of satisfaction and perceived learning outcomes in E-learning environments. Education and Information Technologies, 2021, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 1223–1270. doi: 10.1007/s10639-020-10286-1.
  17. Kintu M.J., Zhu C., Kagambe E. Blended learning effectiveness: the relationship between student characteristics, design features and outcomes. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 2017, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 1–20. doi: 10.1186/s41239-017-0043-4.
  18. Nikolopoulou K. Face-To-Face, Online and Hybrid Education: University Students’ Opinions and Preferences. Journal of Digital Educational Technology, 2022, vol. 2, no. 2, article number ep2206. doi: 10.30935/jdet/12384.
  19. Bordovskaya N.V., Koshkina E.A., Melkaya L.A., Tikhomirova M.A. Criteria for assessing the effectiveness of blended learning technologies used at the university. Integratsiya obrazovaniya, 2023, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 64–81. doi: 10.15507/1991-9468.110.027.202301.064-081.
  20. Zimmerman W.A., Kulikowich J.M. Online learning self-efficacy in students with and without online learning experience. American Journal of Distance Education, 2016, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 180–191. doi: 10.1080/08923647.2016.1193801.
  21. Gafurov I.R. From the editor: The modern mission of large university complexes in teacher education. Obrazovanie i samorazvitie, 2021, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 146–151. EDN: ABDHHX.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

Copyright (c)



This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies