Learning effectiveness of a flexible learning study programme in a blended learning design: why are some courses more effective than others?

IF 8.6 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Claude Müller, Thoralf Mildenberger, Daniel Steingruber
{"title":"Learning effectiveness of a flexible learning study programme in a blended learning design: why are some courses more effective than others?","authors":"Claude Müller,&nbsp;Thoralf Mildenberger,&nbsp;Daniel Steingruber","doi":"10.1186/s41239-022-00379-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Flexible learning addresses students' needs for more flexibility and autonomy in shaping their learning process, and is often realised through online technologies in a blended learning design. While higher education institutions are increasingly considering replacing classroom time and offering more blended learning, current research is limited regarding its effectiveness and modifying design factors. This study analysed a flexible study programme with 133 courses in a blended learning design in different disciplines over more than 4 years with a mixed-methods approach. In the analysed flexible study programme, classroom instruction time was reduced by 51% and replaced with an online learning environment in a blended learning format (<i>N</i> students = 278). Student achievement was compared to the conventional study format (<i>N</i> students = 1068). The estimated summary effect size for the 133 blended learning courses analysed was close to, but not significantly different from, zero (<i>d</i> = - 0.0562, <i>p</i> = 0.3684). Although overall effectiveness was equivalent to the conventional study format, considerable variance in the effect sizes between the courses was observed. Based on the relative effect sizes of the courses and data from detailed analyses and surveys, heterogeneity can be explained by differences in the implementation quality of the educational design factors. Our results indicate that when implementing flexible study programmes in a blended learning design, particular attention should be paid to the following educational design principles: adequate course structure and guidance for students, activating learning tasks, stimulating interaction and social presence of teachers, and timely feedback on learning process and outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":13871,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education","volume":"20 1","pages":"10"},"PeriodicalIF":8.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9934945/pdf/","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-022-00379-x","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Flexible learning addresses students' needs for more flexibility and autonomy in shaping their learning process, and is often realised through online technologies in a blended learning design. While higher education institutions are increasingly considering replacing classroom time and offering more blended learning, current research is limited regarding its effectiveness and modifying design factors. This study analysed a flexible study programme with 133 courses in a blended learning design in different disciplines over more than 4 years with a mixed-methods approach. In the analysed flexible study programme, classroom instruction time was reduced by 51% and replaced with an online learning environment in a blended learning format (N students = 278). Student achievement was compared to the conventional study format (N students = 1068). The estimated summary effect size for the 133 blended learning courses analysed was close to, but not significantly different from, zero (d = - 0.0562, p = 0.3684). Although overall effectiveness was equivalent to the conventional study format, considerable variance in the effect sizes between the courses was observed. Based on the relative effect sizes of the courses and data from detailed analyses and surveys, heterogeneity can be explained by differences in the implementation quality of the educational design factors. Our results indicate that when implementing flexible study programmes in a blended learning design, particular attention should be paid to the following educational design principles: adequate course structure and guidance for students, activating learning tasks, stimulating interaction and social presence of teachers, and timely feedback on learning process and outcomes.

Abstract Image

混合式学习设计中灵活学习计划的学习效果:为什么有些课程比其他课程更有效?
灵活学习解决了学生在塑造学习过程中对更大灵活性和自主性的需求,通常通过混合学习设计中的在线技术实现。虽然高等教育机构越来越多地考虑取代课堂时间,提供更多的混合学习,但目前关于其有效性和修改设计因素的研究有限。本研究分析了一个灵活的学习计划,包括133门课程,在不同学科的混合学习设计中,采用混合方法,为期4年多。在分析的灵活学习计划中,课堂教学时间减少了51%,取而代之的是混合学习形式的在线学习环境(N名学生= 278名)。将学生成绩与传统学习形式进行比较(N名学生= 1068名)。所分析的133个混合学习课程的估计总效应大小接近于零,但没有显著差异(d = - 0.0562, p = 0.3684)。虽然总体有效性与传统研究形式相当,但观察到课程之间的效应大小存在相当大的差异。根据课程的相对效应大小以及详细分析和调查的数据,异质性可以通过教育设计因素实施质量的差异来解释。我们的研究结果表明,当在混合学习设计中实施灵活的学习计划时,应特别注意以下教育设计原则:适当的课程结构和对学生的指导,激活学习任务,激发教师的互动和社会存在,以及对学习过程和结果的及时反馈。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
19.30
自引率
4.70%
发文量
59
审稿时长
76.7 days
期刊介绍: This journal seeks to foster the sharing of critical scholarly works and information exchange across diverse cultural perspectives in the fields of technology-enhanced and digital learning in higher education. It aims to advance scientific knowledge on the human and personal aspects of technology use in higher education, while keeping readers informed about the latest developments in applying digital technologies to learning, training, research, and management.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信