CHAPTER II

Review of Related Literature

This chapter presents the literature relevant to the present study. It includes
discussion on the following topics: (1) learners’ perceptions of their use of time in a
blended learning environment; (2) Students’ perceive their overall learning and
performance in a blended learning environment; (3) Effect on a blended learning
environment in student – student and student – teacher; (4) Describe the overall
experiences in a blending learning environment.

Concepts of Blended Learning Environment

Blended Learning considered to be essential for student learning as no single method or
learning environment would be sufficient for all students in any particular subject. The use of BL
has been shown to have multiple benefits in several contexts. For example, BL has been
studied in economics (Zhang, Zhang, & Seilier, 2014.
Benefits of BL over that of traditional courses have included the ability to allow students
to study at their own pace (Caulfield,2011; Linder & E., 2017), improved students outcomes
(Means, Toyama, Murphy, Bakia, & Jones, 2010; Tsai et al., 2011.
Increased student engagement (Baepler, Walker, & Driessen, 2014; Smith, Groves,
Bowd, & Barber, 2012) and increased student satisfaction.
(Marinez – Caro & Campuzano – Bolarin, 2011. They noted that since students enrolled
in BL classrooms were able to listen to a significant portion of the course content online, more
time was gained for the creation of a face to face (F2F) learning environment in which active
participation increased.
Yilmaz (2017) determined that undergraduate students enrolled in BL because they
thought that the BL course design would provide for (1) better information sharing, (2) more
practical and functional interactions, (3) easier course preparation and evaluation, (4) increased
student engagement in research, (5) increased study time, (6) better preparation for the lecture,
(7) greater cooperative learning, and (8) innovative instruction.

The findings showed positive perceptions of student on the blended learning

environment. However, the problem of slow Internet connectivity and lack of Internet access for
some of the students outside the campus hindered the effectiveness of the blended learning
environment for a few students. (by SA Gyamfi.2015).
Blended learning effectiveness has quite a number of underlying factors that pose
challenges. One big challenge is how about users can successfully use the technology and
ensuring participants’ commitment given the individual learners characteristics and encounters
with technology (Hoffmann, 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.
In Greer, Hudson and 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 a learner from all areas in web – based courses and this maybe from family, friends,
co – workers as well as peers in class.

This particular study into the learning outcomes and experiences of students, delivered
as a blended curriculum, supports the increasing global trend in the use of Blended Learning as
an effective content delivery method in higher education. The delivery of this method may
include one or any combination of modes to accompany the face – to – face, using social
media, to problem – solving gamification, to video conferencing with each other or with industry
participants, to role playing activities, to virtual learning systems, to online interactive quizzes or
challenges available online (Hamilton and Tee 2010).
Students engagement has an important influence on the achievement and learning in
higher education (Kahu 2013).
Coates (2005) defines the student engagement as the student’s interaction with learning
activities and resources intended to produce authentic learning.
From the educators’ perspective, student engagement encompasses involvement with
co – curricular activities and interaction with faculty and peers (Pascarella and Terenzini 2005;
Kuh 2009 cited in Junco et al. 2011.
In Collaco’s (2017) focus groups, students define student engagement as being present
and attentive, interaction with peers and teachers, and enjoyment with the learning tasks.
Jokinen and Mikkonen, 2013; Robinia and Anderson,2010; Sword, 2012), faculty staff
from across academia possess limited multi – media literacy leaving them inadequately
prepared to work in online environments.
Castleand McGuire (2010) highlight that the advent of online teaching requires the
utilization of innovative and evolving technology, which warrant the assumption of new skills.
Moskat et al. (2013)insist on having a learning specialist or an instructional designer to
lead the development program and consult the teachers on creating the online content.
Studies have been done to analyze the advantages of Online learning. Al _ Mobark’s
(2003) study reported on research such as Al – Oud & Al Hamed, 1424/2003; and Al Rashed,
1424/2003, which favored online learning because its give students a sense of privacy when
she make mistakes and its uses variety learning aids, multimedia and audio and video clips
develop his/ her thinking skills.
 Bleimann (2004) believe that the availability of the course of all the time on the Internet
leads to flexible learning i.e. the student can learn what she needs at anytime, at any place and
at his/her own pace. It meets the needs of different learning styles.
Piskurich (2006) believe that online learning saves the time and the cost of traveling if
the school is far away; uses different methods for reinforcement and it helps in retention by
replicating the activity or the information presentation. Online learning also produces
collaborative learners who can learn in groups (Piskurich, 2006).
This because it courages students to interact with theteacher and other students using
means that can help in reducing learning stress and prompting the students’ skills ( Lai &
Kritsonis, 2006).
Online learning motivates the student to construct his/her knowledge. By using online
resources, the students is engaged in the learning process i.e. s/he is an active member in the
learning process. Online learning can be used to encourage students to take responsibility for
their learning ( Naqvi, 2006), and thus produces independent students.
Bleimann (2004) saw delayed feedback due to the unavailability of the teacher when
needed, as a disadvantage of online learning.
Piskurich (2006) asserted that online learning requires more time from the teacher in
designing the course, and monitoring discussion boards or chat rooms. Online learning does not
have f2f interactionwhich may decrease students’ motivation to learn (Mackay & Stockport,
2006) and increase the student’s feeling of isolation.
The high cost of software, the lack of technical support, the lack of training for the
students and the teachers (Ross, McGraw & Burdette, 2001), and the low of speed of the
Internet, especially in transferring audio and video conferences (Almosa, 2001), may hinder the
learning process.
Makkar, Alsadoon, Prasad & Elchouemi stated, BL provides: (1) an environment for
learning and teaching without time or distance restrictions; and (2) flexibility in students’ desire
to enchance their academic performance.
Brown & Liedholm, compared three modes of instruction – pure F2F, blended and pure
online, and their conclusion was that in the F2F mode students did significantly better in the
most complex contents than the online students in a BL environment.
The outcomes of a study by Kwak, Menezes & Sherwood, strongly suggest that BL does
not influence student performance at all. Moreover, student performance is not affected by the
introduction of BL, irrespective of students’ age, nationality, primary language or achievement
level.
Furthermore, although students may plan to skip classes and then catch up later using
online materials, they are often not disciplined enough to follow this through. Several studies
found small negative effects of hybrid class in various contexts; Joyce et al. (2015) Kwak et al.
(2015)
Figlio et al. (2013) and Bowen et al. (2014) compared traditional and fully online classes
and found modest evidence that students in the live learned more.
 Cohen’s, guidelines for describing effect sizes, the final course performance difference
was a medium effect. This was true even after accounting for pre – existing student differences
in academic achievement.
The continuity of a program that allows students to be self – paced and rfeceive
feedback is important to positive learning outcomes in any setting (Marzano, Pickering, &
Polack, 2001).
The practice of teachers adjusting for student learning styles is not in the traditional
classroom in a uniform manner at the middle school in the study. Teachers in a quality trained
blended learning program, like Summit Learning, adjust student learning styles in a uniform
manner through individual student data monitoring (Summit, 2017).
Middle school aged students are different levels of maturity and varying developmental
stages (Anderson, Poellhuber, & McKerlich,2010).
It is important to understand the differences in maturity level, age and learning styles of
secondary students as compared to post – secondary students. Secondary students are
dissimilar of group of learners, and considerations need to be considered for learning
environments (Kay, 2012).
Thang et al., 2013); Students are digital learners who need instruction that matches their
individual needs as educators navigate mandates. Evaluation of school’s districts involves
analyzing different parts of the accountability model. Exploring innovative solutions will advance
student achievement and academic growth.
Simon, Jackson, & Maxwell, 2013; Today, traditional learning models and settings vary
little from the factory model. Teachers and students are still in the same physical space on the
same schedule delivering and receiving instruction.
Yapici & Akbayin, 2012; School and parents for students that lacked access ordered full
curriculum, assignments and materials.
Caruth & Caruth, 2013; Edwards et al., 2013, In the early 1990s, the internet made
distance learning more accessible and brought online and virtual learning to the educational
landscape. Online learning provide flexibility to students as learning could be anytime –
anywhere.
The loss of personal, face – to - face communication is a barrier to digital learning,
especially with younger students in the K – 12 setting. These younger students may not have
the developmental processes necessary to seek help, inquire appropriately, or discern the
information sent by an instructor in a remote location (Anderson et al., 2010).
Blended learning marries the benefits of traditional learning models with online or
distance learning models to improve learning for the student (Newbury, 2013).
Trough the blended learning model, students have demonstrated higher levels of
understanding through combined practices of online and tradition instructional methods
(Halverson et al.,2012; Picciano et al., 2012).
 The constructivist principles from stronger support for blended learning in the context of
how knowledge is constructed for the student. In a blended learning setting, students construct
knowledge through student - centered active learning (al – Hunedi & Schruers, 2012).

Analysis

To provide extra credence to the present study, the researcher made an extensive
review of various conceptual and research literature made by various recognized authorities
pertinent to the different variables dealt with in this study.
The blended learning environment performance and other related topics were thoroughly
tackled and discussed in this chapter making these as bases of the researcher in her attempt to
have deeper interpretation and analysis of the results of the study.
Moreover, extensive analyses of the findings of the past researches on the relationship
between face – to – face and blended learning environment affects to the students performance
were provided in this chapter.