Q 2012 by The International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology BIOCHEMISTRY AND MOLECULAR BIOLOGY EDUCATION

Vol. 40, No. 4, pp. 222–228, 2012

Articles

Blended Learning in Biochemistry Education

ANALYSIS OF MEDICAL STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS

Received for publication, February 13, 2012; accepted 17 April 2012

Rosilaine de Fátima Wardenski‡, Marina Bazzo de Espı́ndola§, Miriam Struchiner‡, and

Taı́s Rabetti Giannella‡
From the ‡Educational Technology for Health Center, Federal University at Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil,
§Center for Educational Sciences, Federal University at Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, Brazil

The objective of this study was to analyze first-year UFRJ medical students’ perceptions about the
implementation of a blended learning (BL) experience in their Biochemistry I course. During the first se-
mester of 2009, three Biochemistry professors used the Constructore course management system to de-
velop virtual learning environments (VLEs) for complementing course Modules I, II, and IV, using different
resources and activities. Forty-nine students (46%) took part in the study. Results show that, in general,
students gave positive evaluations to their experiences with BL, indicating that the VLEs have not only
motivated but also facilitated learning. Most of the students reported that access to resources in the
three modules provided a more in-depth approach to Biochemistry education and greater study
autonomy. Students suggested that the VLEs could be better used for promoting greater communication
among participants.
Keywords: Web-based learning, biochemistry education, teaching in medical schools.

INTRODUCTION Navarro et al. [8], the main difficulties confronted in the

In Brazil, the integration of Information and Communi-
cation Technologies (ICT) in higher education institutions
has been consolidating since 2001, with the Ministry of
Education enactment n8 2.253/2001 [1], which made offi-
cial the provision of blended learning (BL) up to 20% of
the total program class hours. Although the private edu-
cational sector has immediately benefited of BL activ-
ities, Brazilian public universities are still in the process
of integrating this learning approach in their traditional
practices [2–4].
Although various experiences reported in the literature
have reinforced the potential for ICT use in education,
one should be cautious about affirming that any initiative
to implement these resources leads directly to improve-
ments in teaching-learning processes [5]. The develop-
ment of a new educational strategy, such as these
blended lessons and activities, must be accompanied
with a broad discussion and analysis of the specific con-
text of their application, considering not only the nature,
structure, and educational objectives, but also the profile
and expectations of the students involved [5, 6].
As participation in blended activities is mediated by
technology, it requires access to adequate hardware and
software, and the development of knowledge and abil-
ities, such as student autonomy, which are not often
explored in face-to-face learning [7]. As indicated by
‡ To whom correspondence should be addressed.
taisrg@yahoo.com.br.
DOI 10.1002/bmb.20618
process of moving from traditional face-to-face activities
to BL activities are the lack of an institutional culture and
the little knowledge about this teaching–learning modal-
ity. In addition, these authors highlight that like distance
education, BL is sometimes perceived as low quality
education, which serves mainly to fill gaps in classroom
activities.
Various studies discuss the challenges and advantages
of implementing blended courses in higher education [2,
3, 7, 9]. In health sciences education, the motivation for
exploring the use of ICT mediated activities relates not
only to the communication potential of these tools and to
the opportunity to use a diversity of audiovisual resour-
ces but also to the possibility of constructing an inte-
grated educational model combining basic and applied
sciences [2, 10–12].
Studies [2, 3, 9–11] analyze experiences about BL inte-
gration in undergraduate Biochemistry courses. In gen-
eral, the authors emphasize the potential of using tech-
nology to offer audiovisual resources to facilitate bio-
chemical phenomena understanding, to involve students
in research activities, and to promote collaboration
among participants.
In order to support science and healthcare university
professors to integrate ICT in teaching, an Internet-based
authoring tool, the Constructore [12], has been adopted
in different BL activities in graduate and undergraduate
courses at Federal University in Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ).
E-mail: The analysis of blended educational experiences sup-
ported by the use of Constructore has contributed to the
222 This paper is available on line at http://www.bambed.org

construction of knowledge about ICT integration in sci-
ence and health education.
In this context, the objective of this study is to analyze
the perceptions of first-year medical students at UFRJ
about their experiences with BL activities with the use of
the Constructore tool, in Biochemistry I course.
Review of the Literature
BL can be defined as the combination of classroom
learning methodologies, where some units or activities
use face to face strategies and others use ICT mediation
[5]. Marin and Nieto [13] affirm that the use of BL can
integrate the benefits of ICT-based education—such as
the diversity of resources and activities, study flexibility,
development of student’s autonomy, and content adapta-
bility to different students’ interests and abilities—with
the benefits of face-to-face learning that include direct
access to the professor and the socio-cultural experi-
ence provided by the university environment.
There is a vast international literature that analyzes
experiences with BL reinforcing the need to integrate
multimedia knowledge representation resources with the
communication potential of the ICTs, with innovative edu-
cational approaches [5, 6, 12, 13]. As Bonk et al. [5] indi-
cate, BL is a strategy that allows students to become
more familiar with ICT and to construct autonomous
learning abilities. Nevertheless, the authors emphasize
that this approach is more complex than only face-to-
face or only distance learning, as it challenges teachers
to articulate different learning strategies when creating
complementary and integrated dynamics.
In the process of reviewing the literature for the pres-
ent study, it was possible to identify some studies specif-
ically related to the analysis of BL experiences in Bio-
chemistry teaching [2, 3, 9, 11].
Amaral et al. [11] report an implementation of BL in a
Biochemistry course for future nurses. Based on the
complexity of teaching and learning Biochemistry, which
requires high level of abstraction to describe the phe-
nomena taking place at molecular level, the authors con-
structed a virtual learning environment (VLE) to support
their educational activities. The VLE provided content
resources, exercises, and clinical cases. Students were
required to explore this virtual material before coming to
face-to-face classes, when there were group discus-
sions. This VLE was evaluated by comparing students’
rate of approval in the 2 years of its use with students’
performances in classes previous to the use of this meth-
odology. Results indicate greater student interaction in
face-to-face activities and a decrease in the rate of fail-
ure and dropouts as compared with previous years.
Macaulay et al. [9] evaluated the implementation of a
BL Biochemistry course for Nutrition students. The use
of BL was motivated by the need to conduct a contex-
tualized approach to metabolism teaching using prob-
lem-solving exercises and case-studies to introduce Bio-
chemistry concepts based on real situations related to
Nutrition clinical practice. The authors found that the use
of BL allowed for diversified teaching methodologies and
223
contemplated different student learning styles. In addi-
tion, the authors emphasized that students felt motivated
because they were more intellectually stimulated with
both the learning strategy and learning environments.
In the context of a southern Brazilian University, Hei-
drich and Angotti [3] report the results of a study with the
use of two VLEs, one aimed at Basic Biochemistry and
the other aimed at Physiological Biochemistry, which pro-
vided content resources and clinical cases with discus-
sions in virtual forums. The authors evaluated the VLEs
through student questionnaires. In general, the experien-
ces were evaluated positively, mainly because of the op-
portunity to access the study materials at home, before
classroom activities. In relation to the forums, it was
observed that the majority of the students waited for the
professors’ initiative in the debates and felt insecure to
present their doubts or to ask for their colleagues explan-
ations. This result revealed a prevailing dependency on
the professor participation.
The experience reported by Espindola et al. [2] reinfor-
ces the potential of BL as a strategy for teaching com-
plex and abstract concepts as those related to the proc-
esses of energy metabolism in a integrated and contex-
tualized approach with the adoption of ‘‘inquiry-based
activities.’’ The BL experience was implemented with
undergraduate Medical students. The inquiry-based
activities were the core of the course and included dis-
tance activities (scientific articles readings, group studies,
and presentation preparations) and face-to-face classes
(lecture classes, group presentations). By the end of the
module, students answered an evaluation questionnaire,
which revealed favorable perceptions about the BL dy-
namics. Compatible with the findings of Heidrich and
Angotti [3], in this experience, students emphasized the
importance of having access to educational materials
and the opportunity to have new channels to communi-
cate with the professor. In relation to the scientific
articles, although the students found them somewhat dif-
ficult to understand, they affirmed that they are important
for learning scientific terminology.
METHODOLOGY
Subjects
Subjects of the study were first-year Medical students en-
rolled in the Biochemistry I course. As it is a mandatory course,
all 106 students participated in the BL experience. At the begin-
ning of the course, students completed a questionnaire with
personal data. All students reported having computer with Inter-
net access at home. In addition, they were aware of the on
campus computer laboratories with Internet access for student
use.
Course Description
Biochemestry I is a course offered by the Biochemestry Med-
icine Institute—UFRJ as part of the basic sciences Medical
students’ core curriculum. The course is structured in four
modules: (I) Structure and Function of Proteins, (II) Bionergy, (III)
Lipid and Amino Acid Metabolism, and (IV) Metabolic Integra-
tion. Each module is conducted by a different professor with
autonomy to decide about learning strategies and resources.
In the second semester of 2009 (August-November), three
professors adopted the Constructore tool to build VLEs aimed
224 BAMBED, Vol. 40, No. 4, pp. 222–228, 2012
TABLE I
Summary of the three Biochemistry I Modules VLEs characteristics
Module Content resources Activities Communication tools
Module I: Structure and Class slides Protein function and structure Forum for doubts
Function of Proteins inquiry-based activities: guided
exercises with bioinformatics tools
RasMol, Blastx, and PBD
Module II: Bioenergy Class slides and audiovisual – –
resources
Module IV: Metabolic Scientific articles Online inquiry-based activities: guided Forum for doubts
Integration exercises that stimulated students to Forum for group work
read and interpret original scientific
articles in order to understand specific
pathophysiological situations

at supporting Modules I, II, and IV. Constructore (available at:
http://ltc.nutes.ufrj.br/constructore) is an authoring tool devel-
oped at UFRJ (Brazil) with the objective to support teachers in
the development, publication, and monitoring virtual learning
activities (blended or distance education), without any need for
Web programming knowledge.
In order to provide a general description of the VLEs devel-
oped by the three professors, we gathered information, with
their explicit permission, about each Module presentation text,
available learning resources, and proposed student activities, as
described bellow.
In Module I, ‘‘Structure and Function of Proteins,’’ the pur-
pose of the VLE was to offer access to Bioinformatics tools
such as ‘‘Basic Local Alignment Search Tool’’ (Blast), ‘‘Physico-
chemical parameters of a protein sequence’’ (Protparm),
‘‘Prediction of transmembrane regions’’ (SOSUI), ‘‘Biological
sequence alignment editor (BioEdit), ‘‘Protein Data Bank (PDB),’’
and ‘‘Molecular Graphic Visualization Tool’’ (RasMol) and to
guide students in conducting research activities that help them
visualize and understand protein structure and function. To
guide the use of these software, the teacher designed activities
which should be completed as the students advanced in their
studies, using the Constructore tool. Activities were organized
in eight steps: 1) Protein identification and data collection; 2)
Identification of the primary structure of proteins; 3) Occurrence
of signal peptide and prediction of cellular location; 4) Align-
ment of the sequences of interest
5) Evaluation of relatedness/similarities; 6) Evaluation of terti-
ary and quaternary structures of proteins; 7) Search for similar
structures of the protein of interest; 8) Information consolidation.
In each activity, students were supposed to use the appropriate
bioinformatics tools and complete online questionnaires. Class
slides and tools manuals were available in the VLE. A dis-
cussion forum was also created through which students
could present and discuss their content doubts and learning
difficulties.
The objective of the second Module, ‘‘Bioenergy,’’ was to
inform students about the energy transformations in biological
systems, through the study of various metabolic cell pathways.
In this module, the professor used the Constructore tool to
make available classroom slides as well as complementary
audiovisual resources, and classroom guided study instructions.
No communication resources were implemented in this VLE.
Module IV, ‘‘Metabolic Integration,’’ aimed at providing stu-
dents greater depth in the metabolic integration content pre-
sented in Modules II and III, exploring metabolic adaptations in
different physiological or pathological states such as exercise,
starvation, and diabetes. In this case, the VLE was used to con-
duct group studies and stimulate students to read and interpret
original scientific articles (classic and current) in order to under-
stand specific patho-physiological situations. Students were
presented with guided inquiry-based activities to be answered
with the Constructore support. These activities consisted of lists
of questions which guided students in the interpretation of the
scientific articles, in the recognition of new concepts, and in the
application of these concepts to new situations. The use of the
forum in this Module was more frequent than others and it was
used for students’ doubts and teamwork. Each student group
was provided its own forum space to work collaboratively. The
professor used part of the face-to-face classroom hours for dis-
tance activities.
Table I presents a summary of the three Biochemistry I
Modules VLEs characteristics.
Research Instruments
In order to analyze students’ perceptions about the BL expe-
rience in Biochemistry education, a semi-structured question-
naire was developed. The questionnaire consisted of three
parts. Part I presented students with a list of all resources and
activities available in the three modules’ VLEs; they were
requested to rate on a four point scale (0 for no, 1 for low, 2 for
medium, and 3 for high) the learning relevance of each of them.
Part II consisted of three open questions about advantages and
disadvantages of each module VLE. Part III presented one
question that required students to evaluate their BL experience
indicating if the VLEs have facilitated, hampered, or did not
change their study activities; they were also asked to justify
their opinions.
Instrument Administration and Data Treatment
Students’ questionnaires were administered right after the
course was over, by the end of the semester. The decision to
administer during this period aimed at giving students freedom
to openly give their opinions after course grading.
For the purpose of analysis of the Part I of the questionnaire,
we decided to aggregate the results’ categories ‘‘no relevance
with low relevance’’ as well as the categories ‘‘medium rele-
vance with high relevance’’. This data reduction provided us
with a sharper view of two major tendencies in students’
opinions.
In Part II, student comments were organized according to the
two main categories ‘‘main advantages’’ and ‘‘main disadvan-
tages’’ for each of the three course modules. Some students’
answers were selected in order to illustrate the main findings
about the advantages and disadvantages of each VLE.
In Part III, students’ evaluations were counted according to
the three opinion options about the VLEs (facilitated, hampered,
or did not change students’ activities); some students’ argu-
ments about their evaluations were selected in order to illustrate
students’ opinions in their own words.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: STUDENTS’
PERCEPTIONS OF THE BL EXPERIENCE
Forty nine students (46%) answered the questionnaire.
This moderate response rate may be due to the fact that
 225
TABLE II
Students’ perceptions about the learning relevance of different resources and activities available in the
VLEs of Modules I, II, and IV of the biochemistry Course
Level of relevance
None/low Moderate/high
Resources and Activities N8 % N8 %
Protein function and structure inquiry-based activities (Module I) 23 46.93 26 53.01
Access to texts, videos, and slides (Module II) 07 15.00 42 85.67
Access to scientific articles (Module IV) 06 13.14 33 67.33
Online inquiry-based exercises based on reading and interpretation 07 14.29 42 85.71
of the scientific articles (Module IV)
Online case-based exercises evaluation (Module IV) 20 40.08 19 38.76
Access to routine course announcements (Modules I and IV) 20 40.80 29 59.18
Communication with professors and their student assistants (Module I and IV) 23 46.92 26 53.07
Communication with other classmates (Modules I and IV) 35 71.40 14 18.52

students could be either in other courses’ final exams or
were already out of campus for vacations. Nevertheless
we considered that as it was a pioneer experience at the
university using BL in the Biochemistry I Course, the
results based on this sample would be valid to provide
information to understand students’ views about this ex-
perience for further research and development.
The results of the study are presented according with
the three main questions proposed to the students.
Part I: Relevance of Different Resources/
Activities to Learning
As can be seen in Table II, the resources and activities
that students considered most relevant were the educa-
tional materials provided both in Module II (85.67%) and
in Module IV (67.33%), and the online inquiry-based
activities in Module IV (85.71%). On the other hand, most
of the students indicated that communication with col-
leagues (71.40%) and with professors (46.92%) was not
considered a relevant factor in their experience.
This is compatible with the reports found in the litera-
ture indicating that, in general, students value the oppor-
tunity to access resources used in the classroom at any
place and time [3, 6]. By one side, this may be seen as
valuing the traditional culture of learning based on con-
tent transmission. On the other hand, it creates an op-
portunity to make classroom time more dynamic, given
that students can access and read about the issues to
be worked in classroom in advance [2, 14]. The low rele-
vance attributed to the communication tools may be
related to professors’ low use. Modules I and IV offered
discussion foruns; in both cases they were used mainly
as a space for students placing their contents’ doubts.
As discussed by many authors, offering communication
tools without a specific learning objective tends to be an
inefficient activity, because socialization and collabora-
tion in VLEs demands active teaching mediating strat-
egies [15, 16]. Another factor that may have contributed
to the low participation in the forum is that students usu-
ally prefer to use communication tools out of the VLEs,
where they can discuss privately without teacher’s con-
trol [2].
It should be emphasized that the distance activities
proposed in Module IV (guided studies) were those that
received the most favorable evaluations among all the
items analyzed, which may be related to the fact that in
the distance activities, there was effective professor’s
participation. Another factor that may have contributed
to this evaluation is the fact that in this Module the stu-
dents used part of the classroom time to conduct the
distance activities.
Part II: Advantages and Disadvantages
of Each VLE Module
In Module I, Structure and Function of Proteins, stu-
dents emphasized the advantage of using protein identifi-
cation and visualization software in their learning activ-
ities. For them, inquiry-based activities, not only facili-
tated the visualization and understanding of protein
structures, but also contextualized learning.
The programs used were a great revelation for me
and it was a lot of fun to assemble the protein
structures (S12).
It helped to the degree that it introduced tools for
the study of the protein structure in a contextualized
manner (S29).
Students also indicated that the fact that the VLE
included explanatory notes about the use of the software
helped them conducting the activities.
The VLE helps by providing the steps and links
needed to conduct the tasks easily (S30).
Nevertheless, students pointed out that the need to
learn how to use new computer tools as a disadvantage
of this experience, since it required more time for adap-
tation. Student adaption to these tools is not only related
with the new technical skills required to be able to use
them, but also relates with the need to develop
autonomy and self-study skills. Yudko et al. [17] argu-
ment that these challenges may influence some students
negative attitudes toward BL experiences. Furtheremore,
as online education is a recent activity in Brazilian Uni-
versities, many students do not identify computers and
Internet as pedagogical tools, but as entertainment and
social tools [12].
In students’ opinion another negative element in this
Module was that the activity of structuring proteins
226
became gradually ‘‘mechanical’’ as they learned how to
use the tools.
The concern about correctly structuring the protein
was greater than understanding the issue. The
function of the protein is passed over while empha-
sizing the computing tool (S15).
The tools were complicated and we had little time
to dominate them and, therefore, we lost a lot of
time learning to use them practically on our own
(S40).
But the use of RASMOL in Module I did not contribute
a lot to the course, because it ended up being a
mechanical repetition of the protocol given by the
professor (S43).
Compatible with Espindola et al. [2] and Heidrich and
Angotti [3] findings, students who participated in the
present study were receptive to activities that involve the
use of the VLE. In the case of Module I, the activity
involved using six different bioinformatics programs for
studying proteins’ structures and functions, based on
study guidance provided by the professor. Because of
the opportunity to place abstract concepts in action in
problems that challenged them to think, students valued
the contextualized study of proteins. Similar results were
reported from other studies about the use of Bioinfor-
matics tools in biochemistry courses [18, 19]. In general,
these studies emphasize the potential of these tools for
supporting molecular structures visualization and for inte-
grating ludic and interactive activities.
Nevertheless, it should be emphasized that students
evidenced great difficulty learning how to use the soft-
ware. As indicated by West et al. [7], technical challenges
in the implementation of the VLE are as important as
pedagogical challenges, requiring teachers to prepare
themselves to support students’ technical gaps. If on
one hand the technical gaps may have led some of the
students to consider the activity to be mechanical and
not significant, on the other hand, it is possible that they
did not completely understand their task. In addition, the
activity proposed required that students had abilities for
studying on their own, what probably has not yet been
developed at the time of this study, given that they were
in the first period of Medical school.
Students highly praised Module II, Bioenergetics,
which made available all slides used in the classroom, in
addition to other resources. As presented in Table II, the
resources that students considered most relevant,
among all VLEs, were the educational materials provided
in this module (85.67%). Students indicated satisfaction
with the simplicity of the use of the VLE, and with the
study autonomy and flexibility allowed by the environ-
ment.
It is very good to have access to this content, because
it is not possible to copy everything that the profes-
sor says or the slides. Thus we pay more attention
in class, because we are not as concerned about
copying (S26).
Various materials expand and deepen knowledge
about the material presented (S33).
BAMBED, Vol. 40, No. 4, pp. 222–228, 2012
Nevertheless, the students believe that the communi-
cation with the professor and with other students through
the forums was used very little and generated difficulties
when they tried to resolve their doubts.
(. . .) and the disadvantage was the delay in resolving
any doubts (S26).
The emphasis given by students about the opportunity
to access content resources in VLEs is something widely
discussed in the literature [7, 11, 12]. It should be empha-
sized, however, that this preference is especially strong in
relation to resources used in the classroom (slides), which
are those that are most important in guiding students
when studying for tests. Thus, the testing culture that, in
general, is reinforced in the university context, is reflected
in students’ opinions, whether in classroom activities, BL,
or complete distance education [7, 12]. The importance to
provide online content materials, as students indicate, is
the opportunity to access them, at any time or place,
what may influence the dynamics of face-to-face class-
room situations. In addition, as Heidrich and Angotti [3]
and Amaral et al. [11] indicates, the use of audiovisual
resources can contribute to Biochemistry teaching, con-
sidering the degree of abstraction needed to understand
its various concepts and phenomena.
The negative element reported by the students in
relation to this Module was the little opportunity for
communication with the professor. As in previous studies
[2, 3, 11, 12], this relation with the professors is important
to students and can be better explored in BL contexts.
In Module IV, Metabolic Integration, the dynamic of
online inquiry activities, based on scientific articles read-
ings and group discussions, was perceived as relevant
for learning by the majority (85,71%) of the students who
responded to the questionnaire (Table II). In addition,
since this module opened a communication channel with
the professors (with both commentaries to the guided
study, and with the forum for solving doubts), this aspect
appeared in the positive comments.
The articles provided were important for completing
of the guided studies (S2).
The virtual environment [in module IV] facilitated
communication between the professor and mem-
bers of the group (S26).
Students also emphasized the importance of providing
flexibility to face-to-face classroom hours to realize
online activities, and indicated that this was a positive
factor in the methodology used.
In this Module, as mentioned, there was an opportunity
to conduct the distance activity during class time,
which was a great advantage, because we gained
time to organize the work (S22).
Nevertheless, in this Module, the intensive time
demand was mentioned by the students, due to the
complexity of the articles.
The articles contributed, but there were a lot, and
little time to read everything (S15).

The analysis of students’ opinions about Module IV
revealed how the opportunity for communication, not just
with the professor, but with their colleagues, is important
to them. This result is compatible with various reports in
the literature [15, 16], as it is in the study by Quevedo
[20], in which the students, upon evaluating different
blended courses, presented greater self-confidence and
motivation in courses with intensive professors’ participa-
tion in discussion forums. It is worth mentioning that stu-
dents in the present study tended to be passive and
depended on the professors’ estimulation in the forum,
even for communicating with colleagues.
One difference of Module IV when compared with the
others, was the use of face-to-face classroom time to
conduct distance activities. This is a key issue in BL: the
integration and compatibility between classroom and dis-
tance activities [7, 12]. If on one hand the students dem-
onstrate that they have little autonomy to conduct the
classroom and distance activities during the course, on
the other, the implementation of the VLEs without the
needed reorganization and flexibilization of the discipline
limits their participation. Similar opinions were also found
in a previous study with other Biochemistry class in the
Medical school [2].
Part III: VLEs Influence on Students Study Activities
Considering the use of the three VLEs throughout the
course, it was asked if, in general, the environments
facilitated, hampered, or did not change their study activ-
ities. Thirty four students (69.39%) responded that the
use of VLEs facilitated learning during the course, indi-
cating as main advantages: access to the teaching mate-
rials, study autonomy and flexibility, and the realization of
distance activities that keeps them constantly studying.
The VLE guides study at home and provides more
materials (S6).
I had an idea of what to expect on the test, and it
helped me better understand the material because
of the realization of the guided studies (S24).
I had to maintain constant contact with the material
(S31).
Three students (6.12%) responded that the use of the
VLEs hampered their studies because they were highly
demanding and difficult to conduct the learning activities
using a computer, and 12 (24.49%) students indicated that
the VLEs did not influence or change the way they study.
Because I continued to study at home in the same
proportion, I only integrated articles in my study
activities (S43).
If I compared the use of the Bioinformatic tools with
or without the VLE use, it did not influence learning.
The tool is helpful because it organizes these instru-
ments, but did not help me study very much (S7).
These statements reveal important issues regarding
the implementation of BL activities. Most of the students
realized that the integration of the VLE brought about
changes in the teaching-learning process, and assumed
it as an extension of face-to-face classroom lessons.
227
Nevertheless, it requires the development of a new stu-
dent attitude toward the learning process and effective
professors’ participation in the organization of the VLE,
and in interacting and monitoring students’ work [2].
CONCLUSION
Based on the results of the present study it is possible
to a firm that the integration of BL experiences in under-
graduate Biochemistry courses seems to be an important
educational strategy because it expands access to differ-
ent types of learning resources, offers visualization tools
that facilitate understanding complex biochemical con-
cepts and phenomena, expands the study boundaries
beyond face-to-face traditional classroom space, and
creates new opportunities for interaction between profes-
sors and their students.
Regarding students’ comments, it is possible to point
out some requirements in order to improve these experi-
ences: to strengthen the tie between face-to-face and
virtual activities in the construction of an integrated edu-
cational strategy which facilitates learning and considers
the time dedicated by the students; to provide greater
support and guidance to students when using the VLE
and performing the activities, and to expand the possibil-
ities for communication and collaboration in the learning
process. When implementing BL it is necessary a strong
synergy between face-to-face and distance activities.
The analysis of different experiences such as the one
presented in this article have allowed to contribute for
building more systematic knowledge about the
challenges and potentials of the use ITC in the field of
science and health education. These results also may
be useful to assist teachers’ educational technology
integration.
Acknowledgment— Research supported by CNPq and
FAPERJ.
REFERENCES
[1] MEC. (2004). Portaria n8 4.059, de 10 de dezembro de 2004. Diário
Oficial [da] República Federativa do Brasil, Ministério da Educação,
Brası́lia, DF, 13 dez. Seção 1.
[2] M. B. Espindola, T. El-Bacha, T. R. Giannella, M. Struchiner, W.
Silva, A. T. Da Poian (2010) Teaching energy metabolism using sci-
entific articles: Implementation of a virtual learning environment for
medical students, Biochem. Mol. Biol. Educ. 38, 97–103.
[3] D. N. Heidrich, J. A. P. Angotti (2010) Implantação e avaliação do
ensino semipresencial em disciplinas de bioquı́mica utilizando
ambiente virtual de aprendizagem, Rev. Bras. Ens. Bioq. Biol. Mol.,
1. Available at: http://www.bdc.ib.unicamp.br/rbebbm/edicoes.
php?idEdicao¼12&idMaterial¼831
[4] L. F. Dourado (2008) Polı́ticas e Gestão do Ensino Superior a Dis-
tância: Novos marcos regulatórios? Edu. Soc. 29, 891–917.
[5] C. J. Bonk, C. R. Graham, J. Cross (2006) The handbook of
Blended Learning: Global Perspectives, Local Designs, Pfeiffer, San
Francisco.
[6] H. J. So, T. A. Brush (2008) Students perceptions of collaborative
learning, social presence and satisfaction in a blended learning
environment: Relationships and critical factors, Comput. Educ., 51,
318–336.
[7] R. West, G. Waddoups, C. Graham (2007) Understanding the expe-
riences of instructors as they adopt a course management system,
ETR&D-Educ. Tech. Res., 55, 1–26.
[8] L. Navarro, T. R. Giannela, H. Martis, C. C. Cordeiro, J. C. G. Gaspar,
D. Munhoz, S. Carreira, C. A. Paes (2009) in Digital Proceedings of the
IV Congresso Internacional de Educação a Distância, Fortaleza.
228
[9] J. O. Macaulay, M. P. Van Damme, K. Z. Walker (2009) The use of
contextual learning to teach biochemistry to dietetic students, Bio-
chem. Mol. Biol. Educ. 37, 137–142.
[10] D. K. Yokaichiya, E. Galembeck, B. B. Torres (2004) Adapting a biochem-
istry course to distance education, Biochem. Mol. Biol. Educ. 32, 27–29.
[11] C. L. C. Amaral, R. C. L. Figueira, M. P. Barros (2006) A utilização
de ambientes virtuais no ensino de bioquı́mica: Um estudo de caso
na Unisul. Rev. Bras. Ens. Bioq. Biol. Mol., 1, Available at: http://
www.bdc.ib.unicamp.br/rbebbm/edicoes.php?idEdicao¼4&idMate
rial¼161
[12] M. Struchiner, T. R. Giannella, M. B. Espı́ndola. Technological
Pedagogical Content Knowledge of University Professors who
Adopted an Online Authoring Tool in Their Educational Practices:
A Case Study of Blended Learning Experiences in Health Science
Education, in A. Verbraeck, M. Helfert, J. Cordeiro, B. Shishkov,
Eds. CSEDU 2011—Proceedings of the 3rd International
Conference on Computer Supported Education, Noordwijkerhout,
pp. 56–64.
[13] D. Pérez-Marin, I. Pascual-Nieto (2012) A case study on the use of
blended learning to encourage computer science students to study,
J. Sci. Educ. Technol., 21, 74–82.
BAMBED, Vol. 40, No. 4, pp. 222–228, 2012
[14] P. Ginns, R. Ellis (2007) Quality in blended learning: Exploring the
relationships between on-line and face-to-face teaching and learn-
ing, Internet Higher Educ. 10, 53–64.
[15] G. Collison, B. Elbaum, S. Haavind, R. Tinker ( 2000) Facilitating
Online Learning: Effective Strategies for Moderators. Madison:
Atwood Publishing.
[16] V. Dennen, K. Burner in J. Spector, D. Merril, J. V Merrienboer, M.
Driscoll, Eds. (2009) Handbook of Research on Educational Com-
munications and Technology, Erlbaum: Mahwah, NJ.
[17] E. Yudko, R. Hirokawa, R. Chi (2008) Attitudes beliefs and attend-
ance in a hybrid course. Comput. Educ. 50, 1217–1227.
[18] D. Richard, J. S. Richard, R. Sirochman, S. Weiner, M. Farwel, C.
Punan-Evans, D. Booth, J. R. Bateman ( 2005) Assessment of
molecular construction in undergraduate biochemistry, J. Chem.
Educ. 82, 1854–1858.
[19] S. Bottomley, S. Chandlers, E. Morgan, E. Helmerhorst ( 2006)
jAMVLE: A new integrated molecular visualization learning environ-
ment, Biochem. Mol. Biol. Educ., 34, 343–349.
[20] A. Quevedo ( 2011) O Ensino Semipresencial do Ponto de
Vista do Aluno. Revista e-curriculum, São Paulo, 7, Available
at: http://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/curriculum/article/view/5678/4004.