C S S R 0 8 0 9

C O N F E R E N C E ON S C I E N T I F I C & S O C I A L R E S E A R C H

14 - 15 March 2009

TEACHING MATHEMATICS USING BLENDED LEARNING MODEL: A CASE STUDY IN UITM SARAWAK CAMPUS
Ling Siew Eng1, Elinda Lee Ai Lim2, Kelvin Goh Tee Hiong3 and Lee Beng Yong4
1234

Fakulti Teknologi Maklumat & Sains Kuantitatif, UiTM Sarawa, Kampus Kota Samarahan

lingse@sarawak.uitm.edu.my
This paper aims to determine the satisfaction level of the Pre-diploma (Science) students in using blended learning model. MAT 081 is a Basic Mathematics course with duration of 14 weeks with 5 study hours per week. Two groups of MAT 081 were offered in the semester of July November 2005 and the students attended 4 hours of face-to-face learning and 1 hour of online learning per week in this blended learning mode. This study employed a mixed method design in which quantitative data was first collected through survey and followed by the qualitative data which would help to refine and explain the general picture obtained through quantitative data. A census survey was employed in the quantitative survey. 12 students were selected to participate in the interview. The results showed that the students were satisfied with all components (Content, Learner Interface, Feedback and Assessment, Personalisation, Learning Community, Access and Overall Satisfaction). The overall findings showed that the students were satisfied, happy and enjoy themselves in the blended learning mode used in MAT081 and considered it as an invaluable experience in the process of learning. A large number of students (45%) suggested a mix of 3-hour face-to-face and 2-hour online learning. Keywords: Blended learning, face-to-face learning, online learning, satisfaction

1. INTRODUCTION Traditional face-to-face teaching (Instructor-led Era) has been introduced for more than 3000 years ago (Singh & Robinson, 2001) and is still a dominant form of knowledge transfer. Adapting a technologybased approach in teaching and learning has started since 1960s. In the 1960s and 1970s, the first technology-based training approach came with minicomputer and mainframe had benefits hundreds to thousands of people (Bersin, 2004). In the early 1980s, the arrival of the first personal computer (PC) rushed educators and trainers into PC multimedia technologies (Bersin, 2004). Between 1984-1993, we entered a new era, the multimedia era (Bersin, 2004 ) . With the advancement of Internet and World Wide Web (WWW) technology during the late 1990s, e-learning has become a popular mode of teaching and learning process. In 1994, the Internet technology generated the first wave of e-learning (Ron, 2001). One of the advantages of e-learning is that students can set learning to their own pace and learn at anytime and anywhere. In addition, e-learning course offer students access to the WWW. In this environment, students can take virtual tours of organizations being studied, view streaming video clips, hear audio tapes of CEOs, and interact with people from all over the world (White, 2001). In the middle of 2001, website design, rich streaming media high bandwidth generated the second wave of e-learning which helped us to realize that e-learning alone is not enough (Ron, 2001). In the middle of 2001 also, people were beginning to get a bit gloomy about e-learning. The market was not growing as fast as expected and everyone was suffering somewhat from "e-learning fatigue" (Osguthorpe & Graham, 2003). That meant the use of information and communication technologies in teaching and learning would provide enormous benefits and also some weaknesses (Zenger & Uehlien, 2001). Today, the traditional face-to-face learning is still a dominant form of knowledge transfer. There are some advantages on traditional face-to-face learning over e-learning. The traditional classroom has the major advantages of face-to-face interaction between the students and educators as well as between the students
Paper number: 5304740

C S S R 0 8 0 9
C O N F E R E N C E ON S C I E N T I F I C & S O C I A L R E S E A R C H

14 - 15 March 2009

themselves where students can derive motivation from the teachers and other students (White, 2001). This cultural effect is the most popular advantage in the traditional classroom. According to Bersin (2004), two of the biggest challenges with traditional face-to-face classrooms are lack of scale and long deployment times (Bersin, 2004). According to White (2001), both of the learning environments above offer some advantages that the other cannot replace. Since both methods have their own strengths, some researchers suggest using the blended learning (Garnham & Kaleta, 2002; Osguthorpe et al., 2003) which will provide the optimal mix between online learning and traditional face-to-face learning (Black, 2002; Garnham et al., 2002). The blended learning incorporates characteristics of both the traditional and online classroom settings. According to Barnum & Paarmann (2002), while learners enjoy the power and convenience offered by elearning, they also need some face-to-face interaction to enhance the learning. 2. PROBLEM STATEMENT As the number of students intake in University Teknologi MARA Sarawak (UiTMCS) has increased consistently in the past few semesters and projected to be increased to 200,000 students in 2010, a few questions arise. Is the university ready to handle the increasing number of students in terms of physical facilities? Will the lecturers will be overloaded or need to come back for night lectures because of the shortage of the lecture rooms? To plan for the drastic increase in the number of students in the next few years, it is necessary for the university to look for alternative modes of course delivery to counter some of these problems. The implementation of blended learning course (combination of online learning and face-to-face learning) involves certain number of factors including technology, contents as well as all of the human factors involved. According to White (2001), factors such as course content, student characteristics and teacher characteristics (human factors) will no doubt play a significant role in the successful implementation of flexible delivery modes. The key component in developing an acceptance blended learning approach is students satisfaction (Iron et al., 2002). However, are our students satisfied with the blended learning course? Are they satisfied with the components in blended learning course? 3. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY The objectives of the study are: i. To determine the students overall satisfaction levels with the blended learning course. a. To determine the participants satisfaction levels with the content. b. To determine the participants satisfaction levels with the learner interface. c. To determine the participants satisfaction levels with the feedback and assessment d. To determine the participants satisfaction levels with the personalization. e. To determine the participants satisfaction levels with the learning community. f. To determine the participants satisfaction levels with the access. ii. To determine the ratio of contact hours between face-to-face and online learning in blended learning course. 4. METHODOLOGY MAT 081, a Basic Mathematic course was offered to Part one pre-diploma (Science) students with a total of 5 contact hours per week for 14 weeks in each semester. The traditional lecture approach used in teaching MAT 081 was redesigned to blended learning approach, a combination of traditional face-to-face classroom interaction with online e-learning component. The face-to-face session was scheduled twice a week with two hours each in lecture room. Lectures were conducted during the face-to-face session and quizzes and tests were carried out for the assessment of the students performance. One hour of synchronous online discussion was conducted per week in computer laboratory. However, students were
Paper number: 5304740

C S S R 0 8 0 9
C O N F E R E N C E ON S C I E N T I F I C & S O C I A L R E S E A R C H

14 - 15 March 2009

encouraged to login at anytime and any place in the vicinity of the campus to access the online learning tools. These online learning tools include course content, course material such as chapter notes, tutorials and past semester examination questions, online discussion, quizzes, assignments, forum, e-mail and links to other resources in the Internet. All these served as a supplement to the face-to-face learning mode. Moodle which is an open source software package was used for this blended learning mode. It is a course management system which is able to support and provide the online learning tool that the team had planned for MAT 081. The explanatory design of mixed method was used in this study. This method places a priority on quantitative data collection and analysis in which quantitative data were collected first and followed by the qualitative data. The rationale of employing this approach was that the quantitative data and results would provide a general picture of the research problem and the qualitative data would help to refine and explain the general picture (Creswell, 2005). The population of the research is the Pre-Diploma (Science) Part 1 students from UiTM Sarawak who enrolled for Basic Mathematics 1 (MAT 081) in the semester of July November 2005. The total number of students was 50 with 21 students in Group 1 and 29 students in Group 2. All of them were taken as respondents for the quantitative research. As for the qualitative research, twelve students with six from each group were selected randomly as the participants for an interview session to get the students general perception on the blended learning model used in this course. Out of the six students selected from each group, two each was selected from the Good, Average and Poor category based on the coursework results of the students. Students with 75 marks and above were classified as Good, students with 50 marks and above but less than 75 were classified as Average and students with marks less than 50 were classified as poor. These classifications were done based on the grade and mark implemented in the examination evaluation system of UiTM. The rationale of having a combination of Good, Average and Poor students as the participants was to make sure that the selected students were able to express their thoughts and opinions. Two instruments were created with each of these to collect quantitative data and qualitative data. The first instrument was adapted from by Hisham, Campton and FitsGerald (2004). This instrument consisted of 31 items 7-point Likert scale which was categorized into 7 components to measure the satisfaction level of the respondents on the blended learning model. Students were also asked to choose the appropriate combination time slot for the blended learning model in item 32 in order to help to determine the best combination of face-to-face learning and online learning. The second instrument is structured questions where students were ask to give their opinion on satisfaction with the blended learning course The questionnaire was given to the students to answer on the last week of lecture. The students were given 30 minutes to answer and the questionnaire was collected immediately after being answered. The interview session was carried out in one morning during the study break which was about a week after the quantitative data was collected. The duration of the interview was approximately 1 hour and it was audiotaped and video-taped. 5. DATA ANALYSIS The demographic data and the scores of the items of all components were analyzed using the statistical package for the social science (SPSS) version 12. Data analysis of quantitative data was carried out as explained below. Descriptive Statistics such as frequency, percentages and graphs such as pie charts and bar charts were used to describe the respondents profile. Mean scores and standard deviation were determined for all items of all components identified in this study. Grand mean was calculated as the satisfaction index for all the seven components scrutinized in this study. Percentage pie charts were used to depict the opinion of the students on the appropriate combination time slot for the blended learning model. .The audio data recorded were coded and search for issues related to the overall satisfaction of the blended learning course and the role of students in the blended learning. 6. RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Paper number: 5304740

C S S R 0 8 0 9
C O N F E R E N C E ON S C I E N T I F I C & S O C I A L R E S E A R C H

14 - 15 March 2009

The discussion begins with a short description of the respondents demographic characteristics. The second section presents the respondents satisfaction level as well as the comments on their satisfaction level from the interview. The last section discusses the contact hour for each blended learning component. 6.1 Demographic Characteristic In this study, among 50 respondents, 25 (50%) male and 25 (50%) female respondents involved. From the respondents achievement in Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (SPM) Modern Mathematics, 82.0% of the respondents obtained Grade A, 14.0% of the respondents obtained Grade B and 4.0% of the respondents obtained Grade C. Meanwhile in their Additional Mathematics result, most of the respondents (48.0%) obtained grade C, only one (2.0%) respondent obtained grade A and nine of the respondents (18.0%) obtained grade B, 16 of the respondents fail Additional Mathematics which 12 (24%) of the respondents obtained grade D and four (8%) of the respondents achieved grade E. For experience in using computer and online learning tools, 38 (76%) of the respondents had experience in sending and receiving e-mail, 31 (62%) of the respondents had experience in word processing, 35 (70%) of the respondents participated in online discussion boards before. Meanwhile, among the respondents, 34 (68%) of them did participate in online chart room and 34 (64%) of the respondents had experience in uploading and downloading files from the Internet. This shows that the respondents are familiar with computer and online learning tools. Most of the respondents had access to computer and Internet at the university (98%). 66%, 66% and 64% of the respondents had access to the computer and Internet at the library, at the cyber Caf and at home respectively. 6.2 Students Satisfaction Level on Blended Learning Model Most of the respondents slightly agreed that the content in the blended learning system fitted their need in the learning process ( x = 4.92) and that the blended learning provided them sufficient content ( x = 5.08). Respondents are moderately agreed that the content provided in the system was useful ( x = 5.38) and upto-date ( x = 5.44). The overall mean on content is 5.21 with standard deviation which showed that students were satisfied with the content. From the interview, all respondents seemed happy that they were given a complete content. They revealed that they could read, download, print and share the contents of the course anytime and anywhere. The face-to-face content complemented by the online component makes it perfect for them. Respondents also liked the convenience provided in the blended learning mode. One of them said: On the content provided, respondents also gave some comments to improve the content component such as online example need to have very clear step by step solution, add animation in the solution provided. There were five items which measure students satisfaction level on learner Interface. Respondents in the study slightly agreed that the blended learning system was easy to use ( x =5.36) and easy for them to find content based on their need ( x = 5.28). They also slightly agreed that the system was stable ( x = 4.80) and user-friendly ( x = 5.20). The overall mean of 5.15 with a standard deviation 1.201 showed that the respondents were satisfied with the learner interface. From the interview, all respondents agreed on the advantages in the five items above. They also gave their opinions of the design on the interface which was not including in the items above. They felt that the design of the interface was not interesting and was too traditional and suggested that it should be improved further. In their conversation, they also suggested that the design of the interface to be changed more frequently so that it would be more interesting and will attract them to study. Feedback and assessment component consists of six items measuring the satisfaction level on feedback and assessment. For this component, the respondents agreed that the blended learning system responded to their requests fast enough ( x = 4.82), made it easy for them to evaluate their learning performance ( x = 5.04), and provided testing results promptly ( x = 5.12). Respondents also agreed that blended learning system provided secure testing environments ( x = 4.84) and the testing methods were easy to understand ( x = 4.98) and fair ( x = 4.84). Overall, respondents were satisfied with the feedback and assessment component ( x = 4.94, s = 1.036). From the interview, respondents also commented that they
Paper number: 5304740

C S S R 0 8 0 9
C O N F E R E N C E ON S C I E N T I F I C & S O C I A L R E S E A R C H

14 - 15 March 2009

liked the immediate feedback that they got through in the forum interface. They felt that from the forum, helped them to clear their doubts immediately. There were six items measuring personalization. Respondents slightly agreed that the blended learning system let them control their own learning progress ( x = 5.02), enabled them to learn the content they needed ( x = 5.14), enables them to choose what they wanted to learn ( x = 5.16), recorded their learning progress ( x = 5.16) and learning performance ( x = 4.92), and provided them the personalized learning support ( x =4.94). Overall, the students were satisfied with the personalization component ( x = 5.06). The respondents also gave their opinions on personalization in the interview session. They said that they were very happy because they were free to learn at their own pace with their own style. They also learned the subject anytime and anywhere. Four items measured used to measure students satisfaction level on learning community. Respondents slightly agreed that blended learning system made it easy for them to discuss questions with their lecturers ( x =5.08) and other students ( x =5.18), share what they learn ( x =5.38) and enabled them to access the shared content from the learning community ( x =5.34). The overall mean score of this component is 5.25, which indicates that respondents were satisfied with the learning community component. In the interview, respondents expressed satisfaction on this component. They said that the forum gives them a place to share an interesting website and they can chart with their friends in the forum to sharing their common interest. Two items used to measure access component. Participates slightly agreed that the system was easy x =4.40) and fast to access ( x =4.40). The overall mean score of this component was 4.39 with the ( standard deviation 1.503. This implies that respondents were satisfied with the access. Through interview the researcher found that the respondents were satisfied with the access but feel unhappy with the server problem and the internet connection in the campus. There are three items measuring overall satisfaction. Respondents in the study are satisfied with the blended learning system ( x =5.06) and agree that blended learning system used in MAT081 is successful ( x =5.18) and also agree that using blended learning systems to enhance their educational experience is valuable ( x =5.34). Overall, students are satisfied with the blended learning system ( x =5.19). The qualitative data also shows that students are satisfied with blended learning system. Majority (45%) of the respondents prefer 2 hours of online learning and 3 hours of face-to-face learning. There are (39%) of the respondents prefer 1 hours of online learning and 4 hours of face-to-face learning. All the respondents prefer at least an hour of online learning. This clearly shows that all the respondents prefer blended learning compare with traditional face-to-face learning. The quantitative finding above is verified in the interview session. From the interview session, 9 out of 12 respondents prefer 3 hours of face-to-face learning and 2 hours of online learning per week. There are two students who suggest the 4 hours of face-to-face learning and 1 hour of online learning per week to be maintained. Only one student suggests that the best contact hours are 3 hours of face-to-face learning and 1 hours of online learning per week.

7. CONCLUSION The study found that students were satisfied with the blended learning delivery mode. They were generally satisfied with the components of content, learner interface, feedback and assessment, personalization and learning community assessed in this research. However, students were not very happy with the access to the Moodle system which was not as fast as it was supposed to be and this was compounded by the fact that the internet connection was frequently down. 8. SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH The study focuses on the participants satisfaction levels on blended learning. Below are some issues that need further investigation.
Paper number: 5304740

C S S R 0 8 0 9
C O N F E R E N C E ON S C I E N T I F I C & S O C I A L R E S E A R C H

14 - 15 March 2009

Is that any significant difference in academic performance between students following blended learning and students following traditional face-to-face learning in MAT081? ii. Does the implementation of Blended learning course in MAT081 improve the students academic performance? iii. Does good training in IT influence the students satisfaction levels on the blended learning course? iv. Does the contact hours between online learning and face-to-face learning influence students satisfaction levels on blended learning? REFERENCE Barnum, C., & Paarmaann, W. (2002). Bringing induction to the teacher: A blended learning model. The Journal of Services marketing, 30(2). Bersin, J. (2004). The Blended Learning Book: Best Practices, Proven Methodologies, and Lessons Learned. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Black, G. (2002). A comparison of traditional, online and hybrid methods of course delivery. Journal of Business Administration Online, 1(1). Garnham, C., & Kaleta, R. (2002). Introduction to hybrid courses. Teaching with Teachnology Today, 8. Iron, L. R., Keel, R., & Bielema, C. L. (2002). Blended learning and learner satisfaction: keys to user acceptance? USDLA Journal, 47. Osguthorpe, R. T. G., C. R. (2003). Blended learning environments: Definition and directions. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 4(3), 227-233. Ron, H. (2001). The second e-learning wave. Training, 38(9), 96. Singh, R., & Reed, C. (2001). A White Paper: Achieving Success with Blended Learning: Centra Software. Zenger, J., & Uehlein, C. (2001). Why blended learning will win: The lion and the lamb lie down together. Training and Development, 55(8), 55-60.

i.

Paper number: 5304740