Cultivating blended learning in teaching and learning: teachers

Noraini Mohamed Noh

QR Code Link :
Type :	article
Subject :	L Education
Main Author :	Noraini Mohamed Noh
Additional Authors :	Norazilawati Abdullah Wong, Kung Teck Mahizer Hamzah
Title :	Cultivating blended learning in teaching and learning: teachers

Place of Production :	Tanjong Malim
Publisher :	Fakulti Pembangunan Manusia
Year of Publication :	2019
Corporate Name :	Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris
PDF Full Text :	Login required to access this item.

Abstract : Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris

This study aims to ascertain teachers’ intrinsic and extrinsic factors and their relationship towards the blended learning approach in teaching and facilitating. The study was conducted on 200 primary school teachers who were teaching in a few schools in Selangor and Perak and the sample was selected randomly. The questionnaire contained 11 constructs and self-reporting items were chosen to obtain the data. The findings indicated that there was a moderate positive relationship for intrinsic teacher factors such as individual innovation, information technology specific innovation, computer self-efficacy, ICT knowledge and skills with blended learning practice. There was also a moderate positive relationship for extrinsic teacher factors such as administrators’ support, role of change agents, school and training facilities with blended learning approach in teachers’ teaching and learning. As such, to ensure the success of the implementation of the blended learning approach as well as to increase its practice, the administrators should work to increase the teachers’ academic awareness via promotions, preparing physical and technical facilities, providing support and practice continuously, creating an online learning culture and giving initiative and acknowledgement for teachers who are intent on making blended learning a success

References

1. Almasaeid, T. F. (2014). The effect of using blended learning strategy on achievement and 9th grade students. European Scientific Journal, 10(31), 133–145. From http://eujournal.org/index.php/esj/article/viewFile/4573/4370

2. Bachman, C., & Scherer, R. (2015). Promoting student autonomy and competence using a hybrid model for teaching physical activity. International Journal of Instruction, 8(1). From http://www.e-iji.net/dosyalar/iji_2015_1_1.pdf

3. Bingimalas, K. A. 2009. Barriers to successful integration of ICT in teaching and learning environments: A review of the literature. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & technology Education 5(3): 235-245

4. Bottge, B. A., Ma, X., Gassaway, L., Toland, M. D., Butler, M., & Cho, S.-J. (2014). Effects of blended instructional models on math performance. Exceptional Children, 80(4), 423–437. http://doi.org/10.1177/0014402914527240

5. Briggs, K. C. (2014). Blended learning vs face-to-face instruction: a quantitative evaluation of student achievement in algebra I. Northcentral University.

6. Chang, C. C., Shu, K. M., Liang, C., Tseng, J. S., & Hsu, Y. S. (2014). Is blended e-learning as measured by an achievement test and self-assessment better than traditional classroom learning for vocational high school students? International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 15(2), 213–231.

7. Gong, M., Xu, Y & Yu, Y.H. 2004. An Enhanced technology acceptance model for web-based learning. Journal of Information Systems Education 15(4): 365-347

8. Hamzah, M. I., Embi, M. A., & Ismail, A. (2010). ICT and diversity in learners’ attitude on smart school initiative. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 7(C), 728–737. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.10.099

9. Hamzah, M. I., Embi, M. A., & Ismail, A. (2010). ICT and diversity in learners’ attitude on smart school initiative. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 7(C), 728–737. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.10.099

10. Hu, P. J., Clark, T. H. K. & Ma, W. W. 2003. Examining technology acceptance by school teachers: a longitudinal study. Information & Management 41(2): 227-241

11. Huang, R., Ma, D., & Zhang, H. (2008). Towards a design theory of blended learning curriculum. In J. Fong, R. Kwan, & F. L. Wang (Ed.), Hybrid Learning and Education (hal. 66–78). Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-85170-7

12. Hunt, L., Eagle, L. & Kitchen, P.J. 2004. Balancing marketing education and information technology: matching needs or needing a better match. Journal of Marketing Education 26(1): 75-88

13. Isiguzel, B. (2014). The blended learning environment on the foreign language learning process: a balance for motivation and achievement. Turkish Online Journal of Distance EducationTOJDE, 15(3(10)), 108–122.

14. Jackson, S.L. 2006. Research Methods and Statistics: A Critical Thinking Approach. Edisi ke-2. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth

15. Korkmaz, O., & Karakus, U. (2009). The impact of blended learning model on student attitudes towards geography course and their critical thinking dispositions and levels. The Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 8(4), 51–63. From dari http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ859497.pdf

16. Lee, L. T., & Hung, J. C. (2015). Effects of blended e-learning: a case study in higher education tax learning setting. Human-centric Computing and Information Sciences, 5(1), 13. http://doi.org/10.1186/s13673-015-0024-3

17. Martin, J. S., Kreiger, J. E., & Apicerno, A. L. (2015). Effectiveness of a hybrid classroom in the delivery of medical terminology course content relative to a traditional classroom format. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 15(5), 72–81. http://doi.org/10.14434/josotl.v15i5.13994

18. Magdy, S. A. (2016), Measuring Attitudes toward Blended Learning Environment among Undergraduate Students in Palestine, International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development 2016, Vol. 5, No. 4 ISSN: 2226-6348. http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARPED/v5-i4/2454

19. McDonald, J, McPhail, J., Maguire, M. & Millett, B. 2004. A conceptual model and evaluation process for educational technology learning resources: a legal case study. Educational Media International 41(4): 281-90.

20. Misman, J., Sharipp, M. T. M., Sharipp, M. T. M., & Shaidin, S. (2019). Islamic Perspectives: Using New Media in Education. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 9(1), 12–21.

21. Azli, M. (2016). Blended learning: Pedagogy, learning styles, and assessment activities in the classroom. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 3(11), 36–39.

22. Yeop, M. A. (2016). Blanded learning: A literature review on teacher acceptance factors through acceptance models. Journal of Research, Policy & Practice of Teachers & Teacher Education, 6(1), 67-85.

23. Nurain, R., Balakrishnan, M., & Wan, A. J. W. Y. (2015). Attitude and motivation of Malaysian secondary school students â€TM learning of ESL in a blended learning environment. In eProceeding of the Global Conference on Technology in Language Learning 2015. http://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.4966.6646

24. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations. Edisi ke-5. New York: Free Press.

25. Seri Rahayu, H. (2011). Teachers’ beliefs and use of ICTs in malaysian smart schools: a case study. In Changing Demands, Changing Directions. Proceedings ascilite Hobart 2011 (hal. 522–525).http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/hobart11/downloads/papers/Hamidposter.pdf

26. Siew-Eng, L., & Muuk, M. A. (2015). Blended learning in teaching secondary schools’ English: a preparation for tertiary science education in Malaysia. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 167(October), 293–300. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.12.677

27. Siti Nazuar, S. (2014). Barriers influencing teacher ’s technology integration in their teaching practice. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 8(23), 352–357.

28. Van Fleet, C. & Wallace, D. 2003. Virtual libraries: real threats. Reference & User Services 42: 188- 191.

29. Vatanartiran, S., & Karadeniz, S. (2015). A needs analysis for technology integration plan: challenges and needs of teachers. Contemporary Educational Technology, 6(3), 206–220. Diambil Dari http://web.a.ebscohost.com.ezpustaka.upsi.edu.my/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=028 39cfb-7b1d-47cb-871a-361f9d93bc8f@sessionmgr4002&vid=1&hid=4204

30. Vatanartiran, S., & Karadeniz, S. (2015). A needs analysis for technology integration plan: challenges and needs of teachers. Contemporary Educational Technology, 6(3), 206–220. Taken from http://web.a.ebscohost.com.ezpustaka.upsi.edu.my/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=02839cfb-7b1d-47cb-871a-361f9d93bc8f@sessionmgr4002&vid=1&hid=4204

31. Wan Zah, W. A., Hajar, M. N., Azimi, H., & Hayati, A. (2009). The conditions and level of ICT integration in Malaysian Smart Schools. International Journal of Education and Development using ICT, 5(2), 21–31. Taken from http://ijedict.dec.uwi.edu//viewarticle.php?id=618&layout=html

32. Wayne, J. (2012). Effective learning - blended learning and virtual learning environment. Taken from http://www.selfgrowth.com/articles/effective-learning-blended-learning-and-virtual-learningenvironment.

33. Weston, T. J. (2005). Why faculty did-or did not - integrate instructional software in their undergraduate classrooms. Innovative Higher Education 30(2): 99-115

34. Wu, Y., Wen, M., Chen, C., & Hsu, I. (2016). An integrated BIM and cost estimating blended learning model – acceptance differences between experts and novice. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 12(5), 1347–1363. http://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2016.1517a

This material may be protected under Copyright Act which governs the making of photocopies or reproductions of copyrighted materials.
You may use the digitized material for private study, scholarship, or research.

Back to previous page