Topic 16 learners’ perceptions of online learning component in blended learning english classes at upt

LEARNERS’ PERCEPTIONS OF ONLINE LEARNING COMPONENT IN BLENDED LEARNING ENGLISH CLASSES AT PHAN THIET UNIVERSITY M.A Tu Thi Tuyet Vy Faculty of Foreign Languages University of Phan Thie

LEARNERS’ PERCEPTIONS OF ONLINE LEARNING COMPONENT IN BLENDED LEARNING ENGLISH CLASSES AT PHAN THIET UNIVERSITY

M.A Tu Thi Tuyet Vy

Faculty of Foreign Languages

University of Phan Thiet

Abstract

This paper presents a case study of students’ perceptions and attitudes towards Blended Learning (BL) course in English at University of Phan Thiet The statement of problem that blended learning of English course annoys students at University of Phan Thiet This paper identifies the perceptions and attitudes that blended learning provides to students’ learning experiences as well as to investigate negative impressions in blended English courses from the learners’ perception This paper also outlines the concept of blended learning courses and e-learning from students’ viewpoints In this paper, the author conducted a survey through a questionnaire at University of Phan Thiet, Faculty of Foreign Languages in both boys and girls colleges There are 130 respondents enrolled in Faculty

of Foreign Languages The questionnaire was designed to measure the students’ perceptions and attitudes towards BL This study concludes that in general the students

’perceptions and attitudes towards BL were positive in terms of the three domains in the questionnaire Moreover, students are encouraged to take responsibility for their own learning process As well as learners can decide when and how to use the resources provided This study also concludes that blended learning is as effective as face

to face learning in developing and improving knowledge and skills It reflects the students’ negative impressions in some points as waste of time, easy cheating and social isolation

Keywords: attitudes blended learning course, learning, learners, and perceptions

INTRODUCTION

Use of technology in education has become necessary and inevitable, not a luxury because

of its positive effectson the teaching and learning process Recently, there has been much attention paid to the growing blendedlearning course in University of Phan Thiet Most of the current efforts have been focused onencouraging students touse blended courses They got appropriate training sessions in how to use and apply all tools and activities inblackboard The blended learning course is one of the important applications of using information and communication technology in the educational process Blended learning

to face and online learning In Saudi Arabia, decision-makers, educational researchers, educatorsand the generalpublic and particularly students are gaining awareness of the advantages of these technologies and are adoptingthem widely, though in some limited domains University of BIsha is one of the universities in Saudi Arabiawhich promotes e-learning centers and e-learning communities Some limited courses arecompulsorily deliveredasynchronously online in the form of blended learning In Phan Thiet University there are three-level strategies courses adopted and implemented in e-learning These three

1 Supportive e-learning, which is a mandatory requirement for all faculty members In this level, studentstake classes in traditional classrooms but can simultaneously use LMS (Blackboard program) to obtaininformation regarding their courses such as announcements, course syllabi, and information regarding instructors Students are also able to share in discussions forums and encouraged to use e-mails

2 Blended Learning, which is optional for faculty members In this level, between 20%

and 75% of thecourse content is delivered online through Blackboard (BB)

3 Full e-learning, in which the course is delivered completely online

University of Phan Thiet has adopted supportive e-learning and blended learning levels of strategy learning, but rightnow the full e- learning has not been adopted

The theme of this paper is blended learning in mainstream disciplinary communities In par-ticular, the paper reports on findings from the last two decades which looked at origination, development and future of blended learning through articles and other research publications In the early 1990s, the conception of online learning formed the possibility

of blended learning (Senge, 1990) Since then studies on online learning have been flourishing towards integration with classroom learning Learners tended to combine the newly acquired knowl-edge with previous knowledge on a certain subject (Collins and Berge, 1996).The 21st century has witnessed vast amount of research into blended learning The simplest form of blended learning was considered as a mixture of physical classroom activities and learning activities supported by online tech-nologies (Garrison and Kanuka, 2004) and was further developed into the integration of learning activities, students, and instructors Advantages of blended learning were extolled by many studies, among which were learning process facilitation via online or classroom technolo-gies (Garrison and Kanuka, 2004; Vaughan, 2007), gap bridging between learning and working (Bohle Carbonell, Bohle-Carbonell, Dailey-Hebert, Gerken, and Grohnert et al., 2013), online collaborative learning promotion (Carr-Chellman, Dyer, and Breman et al., 2000; Gabriel, 2004), higher education benefit (Gar-rison and Kanuka, 2004), effectiveness among large and diverse student cohorts (Dziuban, Hartman, and Moskal, 2004; Sharpe, Benfield, Roberts, and Francis, 2006; Vaughan, 2007), adoptability in many institutions such as higher education (Kaur and Ahmed, 2005), industry (Executive Conversation, 2010), K-12 schools (Keller, Ehman, and Bonk, 2004), the military (Bonk, Olson, Wisher, and Orvis, 2002) and many other sectors.However, problems of blended learning were demonstrated

as well It was argued that professional development would generally benefit from the extensive literature on teacher expertise that focused on how well teachers understood the content they taught and how well they understood how students learnt that content, but

blended learning was not proved useful in teachers’ professional development (Bausmith and Barry, 2011) Some institu-tions were not ready to accept blended learn-ing (Vaughan, 2007) It was even seemed as a dangerous conception (Seife, 2000) in that it threatened the integrity of the traditional pedagogy.As a result, studies on blended learning reached various kinds of conclusions, among which both advantages and problems were revealed, and even the definition of blended learning did not arrive at a general agreement The review of literature on blended learning, therefore, seemed necessary to summarize previous studies and to reveal a clear scenario for future research into blended learning

Objectives of the Study

The objectives of the present study are:

1 To identify perceptions and attitudes of the students towards blended learning of English courses

2 To investigate negative impressions about blended learning of English courses

3 To outline concepts of Blended Learning of English courses and e-learning as students perceive them

Significance of the Study

The significance of the study comes from the perceptions and attitudes of students about blended learning which helps teachers to evaluate the teaching-learning process Yilmaz-Soylu (2008, p 27) said that “The degree of learners’ expectations, satisfaction, opinions

or views on courses has played an important role in evaluating the effectiveness of learning processes” Moreover, when students perceive their experience as enjoyable, satisfying, and personally fulfilling, they tend to interact more, which results in enhanced learning”

In addition, that Esani (2010) determined another important benefit of blended learning is that it saves time And McCarthy & Murphy (2010, p 670) said that "Students would be able to complete programs in less time” In the other side, both face-to-face and online

teaching environments have their advantages; “A mixture of teaching and learning methods will always be the most efficient manner in which to support student learning because only then it is possible to embrace all the activities of discussion, interaction, adaptation and reflection, which are essential for academic learning” (Towndrow & Cheers, 2003, p 57) Al-Saleem et al (2010) in his study investigated the effect of using blended learning on teaching English as a foreign language (EFL) on students’ oral skills The result of the study proved that blended learning enhanced significantly the EFL oral skills of the students of the experimental group due to the teaching procedures This result is explained that blended learning exposed students to unlimited interaction with a language user, using sense of hearing, seeing and interacting Also, the experimental groups were more interested in learning oral skills and that had a positive improvement in their achievements

of teaching in general Bendania (2011) is one of those who clarify positive attitudes and the factors related to attitudes; mainly experience, confidence, enjoyment, usefulness, intention to use, motivation and whether students had ICT skills were all correlated Al Zumor (2013) cited by Aliweh (2011) also take a similar position, investigated Egyptian EFL students’ learning styles and satisfaction with web-based materials Findings of the study showed highly positive perceptions because of an array of benefits (e.g., usefulness, enjoyment,

accessibility, convenience, and richness of resources) Moreover, students’ gender had a significant effect on students’ learning style preferences; it had no bearing on their satisfaction with web-based materials Adas, D and Wafa, A (2011), similarity in his study

approved that the students’ attitudes toward Blended Learning were positive in terms of the process, ease of use and content Moreover, this study reflected the students’ internet and IT skills and interests due to Internet availability and accessibility Alshwaih (2009) as well as reported that the students’ attitudes and investigated the effects of a proposed blended learning towards the English language when teaching medical vocabulary to pre-med students in Arabian Gulf University The findings did not show statistically significant differences regarding achievement or demonstrated a high degree of satisfaction with online unit Some studies contacted with the viewpoints of students regarding blended learning Akkoyunlu and Soylu (2006) is one of those who investigated the view of students

The results of the study revealed that the more students participated in the online discussion forums, the more they achieved and the more positive views they developed towards Blended Learning Moreover, the study came up with the conclusion that both the face-to-face lectures and the online tasks contributed to the learning process (Wing & Khe, 2011) Edwards and Fritz (1997) also take a similar position, aimed to identify the students’ viewpoints in the three teaching methods that rely on the technology, and the study was conducted on undergraduate students The results of the study reported that e-learning is fun and interesting where students were able to learn educational concepts and apply them well, as reported by the students that the outcomes of e-learning materials (blended learning) were better than traditional materials Other studies cleayifed some factors and effectiveness of using blended learning Al-Harbi’s (2010) is one of them who showed that e-learning acceptance is influenced by different factors A student’s attitude toward e-learning and students’ decision to use e-learning are the most important factor in determining a student’s intention to use e-learning, i.e., the influence

of the important people around them Although, perceived e-learning accessibility plays a role in shaping the students’ behavioral intention regarding e-learning acceptance Artino (2010) also take a similar position, found out the relation between personal factors and students’ choice of instructional format The results showed that students who preferred to enroll in online courses reported greater confidence and satisfaction in their ability to learn

online than other students Badawi (2009) similarity, investigated that the blended learning model was more effective than the traditional model in developing prospective teachers’ pedagogical knowledge Meanwhile, the rest of scholars in their studies showed that course system is more beneficial than traditional way and impact of teaching though blended learning or internet In the same vein, Sauers and Walker (2004) found that students in a blended course indicated that their course system is more beneficial than the traditional face-to-face lectures As well as Teeter (1997) identified the impact of teaching with the Internet on the students’ motivation to learn and increase their ability to debate and resolve duties, the results indicated to increase students’ motivation, and inform them of a lot of sources, and improve their ability to debate and solve homework Behjat, Yamini and Bagheri (2012) showed that the Iranian tertiary education contexts that blending traditional classroom instruction and technology can help learners excel in their reading comprehension From these studies we understand that students have satisfaction with blended learning, but they don’t have sufficient exposure to computer technology in the classroom or out classroom Furthermore, the students’ viewpoints and ambiguous instruction and guidelines make students lost and disengaged The mixed findings suggest that technology should be integrated appropriately and effectively within classrooms in order to improve and maximize students’ learning outcomes So this study posits the blended learning to reinforcement exercises and has positive pedagogical impact on them

In the other hand, some studies have reported that students have their anxiety and confusion when interacting with online materials (Burgess, 2008; Baharun & Porter, 2009)

Definition of Blended Learning

There are many educationists defined blended learning in a variety of ways for example:

Hartman et al (2007) defined blended learning as courses that combine face-to-face classroom instruction with online learning and reduced classroom contact hours (reduced seat time) Sands (2002) agreed with what Hartman said stating that, seat time is reduced and some of the course activities information transfer, exchange of ideas, testing, essay-writing, etc are distributed throughout the semester Chan (2008) identify that blended

learning is “the ability to combine elements of classroom training, live and self-paced learning, and advanced supportive learning services in a manner that provides a tailored learning…” Blended learning allows students to dictate their path and pace through online technologies while being supervised within an educational setting face to face instruction Environment conducive to both online learning and face to face instruction are emerging cross the educational system (Horn & Staker, 2011) Blended learning has been described

e-as a pedagogical approach that combines effectiveness and socialization opportunities of the classroom with the technologically enhanced active learning possibilities of the online environment (Dziuban, Hartman, & Moskal, 2004) Whitelock and Jefts (2003) said clearly that blended learning has been depicted as an approach that combines traditional learning with web-based online approaches In addition, Badawi, (2009, p 15) defined blended learning as flexible approach that combines face-to-face learning activities with online learning practices that allow students to exchange collective and individual feedback and responses [in] four specific areas, namely, learner feedback, learner strategies, and alternative assessment synchronously or asynchronously” To sum up, blended learning courses have some face-to-face class meetings, but also have some class sessions that are

replaced with online instruction

So far, there have been various definitions of blended learning Some scholars developed the definition from the aspect of goals and com-ponents, while others started from the blended mode As stated by Garrison and Kanuka (2004), “blended learning is both simple and complex” (p 96), the simplest form of blended learning was a mixture of physical classroom activities and learning activities supported by online tech-nologies Blended learning was complicated due to its vast number of “blends” Both simple and complex blends could be widely used in higher education Various kinds of classroom face-to-face activities were enhanced with technologies that realized peer discussion outside classroom, work experience integrated into the classroom and learning into work Blended learning not only fostered learning process via online or classroom technologies (Garrison and Kanuka, 2004; Vaughan, 2007), but also bridged the gap between learning and working

(Bohle Carbonell et al., 2013) In view of this, blended learning was defined as an approach which integrated online or mobile technologies into physical classroom learning activities The technology-aided activities attempted to improve learning effectiveness through the integration of active learning approaches and/or extensive use of working experiences This implied that blended learning allotted different sections to different instructional methods (lecture, project work, case studies, and thesis) stimulating teachers to create courses with

a variety of teaching and learning methods This could be very challeng-ing, as it required teachers to step away from their usual and normal pedagogies coupled with creativity and innovation which was never easy to accomplish (Carbonell et al, 2013).Blended learning, furthermore, was divided into the “third generation” (Phipps and Meriso-tis, 1999, p.26) of distance education systems The first generation referred to correspondence education using a one-way instructional method, involving mail, radio, and television The second generation meant distance education aided with single technology, such as multimedia projec-tor device The third generation pointed to blended learning, characterized by combining face-to-face learning with various computer technologies to learn and instruct Generally, blended learning meant combination of learn-ing delivery methods, including most frequent face-to-face instruction with asynchronous and/or synchronous computer technologies Com-bination of face-to-face learning and various computer technologies is beneficial to higher education (Phipps and Merisotis, 1999, p.26).The framework demonstrated by Osguthor-pe and Graham (2003) was another useful case in suggesting the definition of blended learn-ing and the goals of blending Rather than the simple combination of face-to-face and online instruction, they defined three components to be blended: (a) learning activities, (b) students, and (c) instructors In addition, they argued that blending learning varied based on different goals such as pedagogical richness, access

to knowledge, social interaction, personal agency, cost effectiveness, and ease of revision.The student response to the provision of online information to supplement traditional teaching was overwhelmingly positive It was clear from the uptake of this area

of technology by institutions, the rise of the use of the term ‘blended learning’ and the number of evalua-tive studies identified in the review (Sharpe, Benfield, Roberts, and

Francis, 2006), that institutions and practitioners were attempting to engage with blended learning and were doing so successfully.Blended learning is not a simple learning method combining virtual and physical learn-ing It could be further defined as the learning mode integrated with various hybrid factors, such as learning environments (online, face to face learning, workplace), brain acquisi-tion mechanism, learning affective factors (motivation, satisfaction, discouragement, and frustration), learners and teachers Especially, different affective factors could be involved in blended learning

Can Blended Learning Promote Online Collaborative Learning?

Advantages of online education were widely acknowledged and demonstrated by numerous studies Online learning environments were negatively evaluated due to the lack of human interaction Therefore, a growing trend was developing towards the blend

of online, offline and classroom learning (Allen and Seaman, 2003) Many successful studies in blended learning showed the significance of reason-able and systemic conception to overcome the limitations of face-to-face and online learning.Blended learning was demonstrated to be able to promote online collaborative learning (Carr-Chellman et al., 2000; Gabriel, 2004; Graham, Scarborough, and Goodwin, 1999) Face-to-face interaction often enabled mem-bers to know each other and to interact with each other When it was not convenient for members to meet, the instructor could design online learning activities for them to participate in order to learn what should have otherwise been obtained through meeting On the other hand, when members were free to meet, the instructor could design activities for them to meet face-to-face and join the activities to-gether (Curtis and Lawson, 2001) In blended learning environments, it was very important for students to hold self-motivation and self-management because there was less time spent

in the classroom where they were inspected by the instructor, coupled with more time outside the class where students should learn by themselves with self-regulation The prominent benefit of blended learning experiences was not to save face-to-face time, but rather to offer students an enhanced learning experience via use of technologies in the process of collaborative learning (Bohle Carbonell et al., 2013).However, there are also

different voices Through investigating the effectiveness, in terms of the attainment of relevant learning outcomes, of the types of learning promoted by educational features commonly incorporated in course management systems, Kember et al (2010) argued that using the Internet for present-ing information in a blended environment did not seem to effectively help students achieve learning outcomes.Whether blended learning could promote online collaborative learning relies on how learning and teaching are blended

If learning could be blended in terms of online and physical classrooms, affective factors, and brain mecha-nisms, then learners could be encouraged and learning could be more effective Teachers could also follow the correct pedagogy Otherwise, blended learning might result in failure

Can Blended Learning Promote Learning Outcomes?

Within the blended learning environment, the students’ performance of the experiment class in the ordinary and especially vocabulary examinations throughout the school term was gradually improved and was better than that of the class in a non-blended situation, so that it achieved number one among sixteen classes in the same grade at the final term examina-tion, by contrast with number eight before this experiment The survey and interview with the students also demonstrated the valuable function of the blended learning system for vocabulary acquisition and listening comprehension, and showed the students’ favor to blended learning design This indicated that the blended learn-ing of English class with the individualized vocabulary acquisition and assessment system can improve the students’ performance in vocabulary acquisition and in ordinary tests (Jia et al., 2012) Blended learning is also widely used to teach engineering courses Méndez and González (2010) investigated the effect of a blended learning approach on an introduc-tory control engineering course This blended learning was designed to release the workload of each student, according to his activity and performance The blended learning was de-signed based on a web tool called Control Web, including a complete scope of control topics and was intensively used along the course The results of the evaluation of

the blended learning attested its efficiency in terms of learning degree and performance of the students.Learning outcomes under blended settings could be promoted Students might

be stimu-lated and encouraged under blended learning environments They could also arrange their learning time and venue according to their will In addition, they were required to attend physical classes This requirement could form a tangible encouragement The intangible encouragement could originate from their interest in flexible learning modes

Is Blended Learning Beneficial To Higher Education?

Combining Internet with classroom learning, blended learning is receiving growing popular-ity among tertiary students and lecturers Many universities were using online components besides classroom lecturing The rapid growth of integration of classroom learning with online learning demonstrated the advantage of this blended mode to cut down educational costs and meet students’ demand for flexibility and convenience (Davidson, 2011; Twigg, 2003) Three years of experience implementing a blend of team-based learning (TBL) and online learning modules in an undergraduate medi-cal course was reported by Davidson (2011) Three sequential cohorts of first year medical undergraduates were surveyed to explore how they valued blended learning during a period of evolving curricular design In addition to a demonstrated increase in acceptance of blended learning, there was a shift in student perceptions of the relative merits of blended learning Medi-cal undergraduates’ appreciations of different instructional methods were influenced by the maturity of instructional design Educational change was best viewed through a longer term lens, acknowledging the necessity for lectur-ers to develop experience in implementing new blended methods in the context of higher education (Davidson, 2011).By combining synchronous with asynchro-nous activities in a synergistic way, blended learning would most likely promote higher education to an unprecedented level (Garrison and Kanuka, 2004) To realize this forthcom-ing level, teaching faculty and course design teams would have to develop corresponding courses and revise existing outdated ones to shift from face-to-face mode to a blended one Strategic steps should be designed to develop blended

learning courses, i.e design, develop-ment, implementation, evaluation and revision, on the basis of the goal to determine both the effectiveness of the instruction as well as the student preferences and perceptions regarding the use of technology to support their learning (Olapiriyakul and Scher, 2006: 299) Ongoing review and improvement were seen

as crucial to the success of the course, and the instructor’s reflections on the strengths and weaknesses of the course were viewed as the primary motiva-tors for revision (Brew, 2008).The effectiveness of the simultaneous use of three different online writing activities, i.e forums, blogs, and wikis in formal university language education was examined The imple-mentation of forums, blogs, and wikis was car-ried out in a course of English as a foreign lan-guage that featured a blended learning design, developed using a learning management system at a university in Tokyo, Japan A mixed-method approach that includes a survey, interview, and text analysis for triangulation was applied The survey confirmed students’ positive perceptions of the blended online writing course design, with wikis being the most attractive medium, followed by blogs and forums Qualitative text analyses of forum and blog postings identified progress in the students’ abilities to distinguish English writing styles The interview script analysis clarified the different benefits that students cited from completing each activity Overall, the blended design met all relevant requirements and was enjoyable for university students (Miyazoe and Anderson, 2010) In a word, blended learning is growingly beneficial to tertiary students and lecturers

Is Blended Learning Effective In Large-Enrolled Classes?

Another prominent advantage of blended learn-ing is to address some of the difficult problems posed by delivering lectures to large and diverse student cohorts (Dziuban, Hartman, and Moskal, 2004; Sharpe, Benfield, Roberts, and Francis, 2006; Vaughan, 2007) Online delivery made it possible to share the knowledge and information among large number of students and students could get access to the information whenever and wherever they felt convenient Face-to-face learning facilitated lecturer-student interac-

tion Students could raise questions and obtain feedbacks from the lecturer on the spot and the lecturer could instantly have an idea of students’ degree of perception through this interaction This could not be realized simply via online learning The instant interaction between stu-dents and lecturer, however, derived primarily from prior preparation of both students and the lecturer, which could be performed online rather than gathered in the classroom It seemed a wise strategy to prepare online for the upcoming lec-ture It was beneficial to successfully blend the online preparation with face-to-face lecturing and learning in large cohorts Blended learning is especially effective in large-enrolled classes due to its simultaneous interaction.Is Blended Learning a Successful Educational Model?The educational institutes are growingly aware that the learning contexts play an essential role in the blended learning Many factors could influence the effectiveness of blended leaning such as characteristics of the student population, mission of the institution, the strategic plan-ning processes, faculty responsiveness, student acceptance, community values, available re-sources, and institution supported mechanisms As a result, many educational institutions, in handling policy decisions, came to acknowledge that blended learning was a useful construct when considered a mental model (Moskal, et al., 2013) Mental models were defined as internally imbedded conceptions of how the world worked

in a generalized sense that was highly influenced by the context where one operated Therefore, a mental model of blended learning was much more conceptual than a formalized working diagram of how it should be accomplished (Senge, 1990) Formalized blended learning, therefore, was widely used.Formulations of blended learning origi-nated from many entities responsible for train-ing their staff Blended learning models were adopted in many institutions such as higher education (Kaur and Ahmed, 2005), industry (Executive Conversation, 2010), K-12 educa-tion (Keller, Ehman, and Bonk, 2004), the military (Bonk, Olson, Wisher, and Orvis, 2002) and many other sectors There were formula-tions based on organizational infrastructures (Khan, 2001) that considered such important factors as development time, program combi-nations, costs, multiple locations and institu-tions, and landscape Learning environment approaches (Norberg, Dziuban, and Moskal, 2011) concerned issues such as interaction, constructivism, communication,

learning com-munities, learning enhancements, cognition and performance support, as well

as synchronicity Added value constructs (Graham, 2006) handled elements such as enhancement, presence, ac-cess, reusability, transformation, replacement and process emphasis Graham (2006) applied this approach to explicate enabling blends that increased access, enhancing blends that incre-mentally improved pedagogy, and transform-ing blends that created fundamental paradigm shifts The term“localness”was further coined

as an mixture of locations, courses, and course modalities (blended, online, face-to-face, and lecture capture) offering students the opportu-nity to have access to education whether they were on or out of campus by blending those elements (Mayadas and Picciano, 2007).Blended learning, which was student-focused methods of teaching, was possibly prevalent in the age requiring new teaching context Several key aspects of that context, i.e the quality of on-line teaching, resources, workload, and student interaction, were associated with the quality of students’ approaches to learning outcomes Positive student percep-tions of the quality of teaching on-line and the level of interaction were strongly related to a comparatively higher grade If teachers desired students to make the best use

of online learning in blended contexts, then teaching strategies that clarified the value of moderation of student postings, and the value of interaction between the students online, were likely to improve both the students’ perceptions and their grades (Ginns and Ellis, 2007).As a result, blended learning could release students’ workload, promote learning outcomes; positively influence both students and teacher It could be deemed as a successful educational model except educational costs and acceptance.Although there are many advantages of blended learning, its problems still exist, which will be introduced and

Can Blended Learning Promote Teachers’ Professional Development?

Blended learning was likely to become an important component of the US educational system, at least at the secondary level (Picciano et al., 2012; Shea and Bidjerano, 2010) Issues on teachers’ competencies in blended learning, however, remained unsolved (Picciano et al., 2012) Teachers’ professional development was an eye-catching issue

since it was closely related to student learning success (Kao and Tsai, 2009) Many considered classroom instruction as an important factor of teachers’ professional development, but there was little evidence about its usefulness (Bausmith and Barry, 2011)

On the other hand, there were several cases of ef-fective professional development, i.e through computerized professional development tools, collaborative teaching practices,

or blended courses (Cheong, 2010; El Deghaidy and Nouby, 2008; Fisher, Schumaker, Culbertson, and Deshler, 2010; Yeh, Huang, and Yeh, 2011) Whereas there has been some progress on the effectiveness of student learning in online learn-ing environments (Means, Toyama, Murphy, Bakia, and Jones, 2009; Shea and Bidjerano, 2010), there was less convincing evidence on the effectiveness of online instruction for teachers’ professional development (Dede, Ketelhut, Whitehouse, Breit, and McCloskey, 2009) Online learning communities varied in terms of courses and schedules They could be and typically were much larger than classroom lecturing and the schedules were often unspeci-fied Their success was dependent on voluntary acquisition and sharing of their knowledge and experiences (Kling and Courtright, 2003; Lin, Lin, and Huang, 2008; Schlager and Fusco, 2003) While research on online communities of students has in some cases used experimen-tal and empirical studies on the professional development of teachers, case studies or other designs left room for speculation about the generalizability of the findings (Matzat, 2013) Some studies reported on successful cases of blended learning for teachers profession (Duncan-Howell, 2010; Macdonald and Poni-atowska, 2011; Motteram, 2006; Tsai, Laffey, and Hanuscin, 2010), whereas others pointed to trials that did not meet their ambitions (Chen, Chen, and Tsai, 2009; Kling and Courtright, 2003; Yang and Liu, 2004) and it was hard to conclude success of blended learning on teach-ers profession.It seemed worthwhile to mention the study which did not prove success of blended learning on teacher profession Effects of a computer-ized professional development program for a concept teaching routine were investigated in two studies Nevertheless, no differences were found between the posttest scores earned by the teacher groups or by students of the teachers (Fisher, Schumaker, Culbertson, and Deshler, 2010)

This study did not indicate significant improvements of blended learning on teacher professional development

Are The Institutions Willing to Change From Traditional Educational Model into a

Blended One?

Studies revealed the advantages of blended learning for both students and teachers (Vaughan, 2007), as it required careful consid-eration of instructional design and combination of technologies with face-to-face learning (Garrison and Kanuka, 2004) Despite the advantages this integrated approach brought about, unwillingness to change remained a major threat to operation of blended learning at the institutional level (Vaughan, 2007) Blended learning was even deemed as a dangerous con-ception (Seife, 2000) in that it threatened the wholeness of the traditional pedagogy while encouraging the use of technologies in education such as online and mobile learning Actually, blended learning was exerting its impact on every level of education For instance, a study predicted

a precipitous drop in the percentage of higher education students joining traditional to-face courses in favor of blended and online modalities (Ambient Insight, 2011) This finding was never unexpected in view of the current use of instructional technologies for developing new learning environments However, the forecast of a 71% decline from 14.1 million in traditional course enrollment in 2010 to 4.1 million five years later was worth our attention If this prediction came true, the policies of higher education would be confronted with major modifications In the early 1990s, the emergence of online learning stimulated much innovative imagination in the field of higher education, leading to many new products to cater for the growing trend As a result, many dreams pursuing wealth ruined due to unrealistic predictions about the nature of the potential student population and overestimates of potential markets (Keegan et al., 2007) Furthermore, the mode of blended instruc-tion had a very weak statistical correlation with student success or persistence (Dziuban and Moskal, 2011) Rather, institutional variables played a role (Stacey and Gerbic, 2008) as critical factors for blended learning and fully online initiatives These variables were drawn from institutions that achieved success in the virtual

face-environment over more than a decade of educational practice There was no“one size fits all”approach doomed to success, nor did success come quickly Rather, it was achieved through continuous effort over a span of several years (Moskal, et al., 2013) Therefore, institutions might be resistant to blended learning due to various reasons

Will Learners And Instructors Actively Participate Into Blended Learning?

he learner’s interaction with online content was one of the imperative factors in determining the efficacy of blended learning towards the cre-ation and maintenance of sustainable learning communities (Anderson, Rourke, Garrison, and Archer, 2001; Grant and Thornton, 2007; Kidd, 2005; Lim and Lee, 2007) The user’s interaction with technologies was actually realized with the aid of online learning environments, which were fast, immediate and convenient (Conole, Laat, and Darby, 2008; Redecker, Ala-Mutka, Baciga-lupo, Ferrari, and Punie, 2009) The efficiency of the blended learning depended on how actively the users could gain its multi-faceted benefits when interacting with technologies According to Wagner (1994), the interaction could be seen as the occurrence of reciprocal events in need of the existence of at least two objects and two actions It was not uncommon for individuals to interact spontaneously in online learning environments (Chatteur, Carvalho, and Dong, 2008) without being motivated or encouraged through interactive strategies or activities.Furthermore, the success of learning was intrinsically dependent on the degree of active interaction that took place in a specific educa-tional context (Herrington, Reeves, and Oliver, 2007) Learners tended to combine the new knowledge acquired by passively interacting with contents, with their prior knowledge on that subject matter (Collins and Berge, 1996) But, interaction should act as

an active process which required learners to contribute rather than passively absorb information (Dias and Diniz, 2013) Interaction with content was an internal connection between learners and the subject Interaction was often triggered and supported by issues

in the learning environment on how the learner interacted with what to be acquired Learning management systems (LMSs) in higher education institutions provided the potential for rich learning environments based on social constructivist theories under the

con-cept of blended learning An essential factor, however, in determining the effectiveness of online teaching-learning is the users’ quality of active interaction with LMSs; yet, in many cases, the users’ quality of interaction has not been properly acquired, mainly, due to its inher-ent qualitative character of passiveness (Dias and Diniz, 2013).By analyzing use of a courseware website, Peled and Rashty (1999) found out that the most popular online activities were passive and were involved in information rather than active contributing They reached the conclu-sion that the students were very aim-oriented in their use of the online technology Further information could be obtained when students had an access to resources They tended to passively share the present resources rather than actively create or provide extra resources (Sheard, Albrecht, and Butbul, 2005) This explained students’ preferred learning mod-els Interactions of doctoral students with an online environment were also studied and it was concluded that student interactions were goal-focused (McIsaac, Blolcher, Mahes, and Vrasidas, 1999) Students were passively us-ing resources according to immediate need (Hellwege, Gleadow, and McNaught, 1996) The average duration of connections to the online resources was over thirty minutes (Hijón and Velázquez, 2006) Insufficient activity of members of online learning communities was a issue that was worth more attention (Macdonald and Poniatowska, 2011) Active participation in the online learning always posed as a problem Passive membership was framed as a “free rider problem” (Kollock, 1999) Even teachers who played the role of instruction could be free riders (Lin et al., 2008) It is uneasy to make learners and instructors readily accept and actively join the blended learning mode.In order to make this study reader-friendly, Table 2 summarized the findings briefly

A number of investigators have assembled a comprehensive agenda of transformative and innovative research issues for blended learning that have the potential to enhance effectiveness (Garrison and Kanuka 2004; Picciano 2009) Generally, research has found that BL results in improvement in student success and satisfaction, (Dziuban and Moskal 2011; Dziuban et al 2011; Means et al 2013) as well as an improvement in students’ sense

of community (Rovai and Jordan 2004) when compared with face-to-face courses Those who have been most successful at blended learning initiatives stress the importance of institutional support for course redesign and planning (Moskal et al 2013; Dringus and Seagull 2015; Picciano 2009; Tynan et al 2015) The evolving research questions found in the literature are long and demanding, with varied definitions of what constitutes “blended learning,” facilitating the need for continued and in-depth research on instructional models and support needed to maximize achievement and success (Dringus and Seagull 2015; Bloemer and Swan 2015)

METHODOLOGY

This study used the descriptive method to study the different variables as many other studies And the present research is a qualitative research that used the survey method to gather data information from respondents To fulfill the objectives of the study the following procedures were undertaken

Participants

The participants consisted of a random sample of 130 (80 boys, 50 girls) students out of (326 boys students and 285 girls students) in 8 different levels of undergraduate students

at the University of Phan Thiet– Full semester in academic year 2017-2018

Data Collection Process

Data required for this study was collected through questionnaire which includes 130 students The questionnaire was distributed in the first term in the academic year 2017-

2018

Instruments

The survey forms included close-ended Likert scale statements (quantitative data) The scoring for the questionnaire was five Likert scale (Strongly Agree- Agree- Undecided- Disagree- Strongly Disagree) The datawas collected using a questionnaire prepared after looking critically at the literature review related to this field The questionnaire was developed to identify students’ views on Blended Learning for English courses Statements in the questionnaire were categorized into 3 main domains as follow:

- The items (1-12) identify the students’ perceptions and attitudes of BL for English course

- The items (13-24) address the negative impressions of BL for English courses from the

- The items (25-36) are related to concepts of BL as students perceive them

Validity and Reliability of the Instruments

The inter-rate approach was followed The questionnaire was presented to some experts specialized from the department faculty members at Bisha University in order to ensure its validity and reliability and provided written feedback According to their suggestions and comments, some items were changed to clarify the meaning Some items were modified in

a way that is more appropriate to the aim of the study The reliability of the questionnaire has been determined using Cronbach’s Alpha The value of this questionnaire using SPSS was 0.79, which indicates a high level of internal consistency for the scale Furthermore, the questionnaire was administrated to (30) students as a pilot study It helped to go for few modifications, improvements and ensured the validity and reliability

Procedures

There are many scientific procedures that are outlined as follows:

- Prepare the tool of the study with the help of previous studies

- All the students who were registered in first term 2017-2018 were collected

- A sample of the study was chosen randomly from the population of the study

- The questionnaire was distributed to the students during their classes and then collected after that

- The data of questionnaire were collected and tested for integrity and clarity

- The results of questionnaire were analyzed by (SPSS program, 16.0) for final result and conclusions

This review was conducted to extensively ex-amine past studies on advantages and problems of blended learning Its major objective was to provide a reference that was as

extensive as pos-sible and one that was useful for any interested reader To achieve this objective, the following methods were used to locate and select stud-ies for the main citation of this review Firstly, online databases including Web of Science and Science Direct were searched ranging from the year 1990 to 2013 for relevant studies The following key words guided the search: online education/learning, collaborative education/learning, classroom education/learning, face-to-face education/learning, hybrid and blended education/learning Once an item was located via electronic search, the abstract was perused If the abstract looked promising, then the item was obtained Another complementary method involved close examination of the references of the selected articles for citations of additional relevant studies.The criteria of selecting previous studies

as the main citation of this study were: 1) the paper included had to be published in a peer re-viewed journal in edited collections; 2) master’s or doctoral dissertations and short reports were excluded; 3) the paper had to focus explicitly or implicitly on blended learning; 4) the paper had to provide a sufficient description of data and data analysis from which the results were concluded.Based on these criteria, 36 publications were found to be suitable for inclusion as the main citations (see Table 1).It is worth mentioning that the included research resources are limited to the author’s own ability The author can only reach the resources within his own scope There may be other publications out of the author’s reach

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

After reviewing and analyzing the previous studies, the study discusses the research into blended learning over past twenty years pivoting on the research questions as follows This study used the method of collecting personal data and questions The personal information about the participants were related to student’s level (1st – 8th), GPA(grade points average) (2-5), gender (male & female), state their opinion about studying English courses as blended learning mode and they have got sufficient training in the use of blended learning These five variables were expected to guide the respondents’ perceptions and attitude regarding blended learning for English course and negative impressions It is very important to constitute a wide picture about background of the participants In this section, the researcher presents results of the study and also discusses their implications In the following Table 1 highlights the personal information data and various variables of questions and answers The results find out that the number of students from level 5-8 is higher than the number of students from (1-4) So the participants from higher levels are more than the participants from the lower levels While the student’s GPA in (2-3) gets more GPA than student’s GPA in (4-5) and student’s GPA in (2-3) got more marks in their studying rather than student’s GPA (4-5) This study shows student’s gender either male

or female, that the number of male students is higher than the number of female students This confirms the finding of Koohang’s (2004) study regarding gender is that boys were more inclined to use the blended learning environment than girls To answer the questions that determined if the students have studied English course as BL mode The ratio of answering was almost the same (see Table 1) In the second questions that if the students have got sufficient training sessions and guidance in the use of BL The answer in negation was (87 out of 130 with 66.9%) said ‘no’ It means that most of students did not get sufficient training and guidance in the use of BL The first domain, twelve items in the questionnaire explored students’ perceptions and attitudes of BL for English course with the total mean of this domain is 3.27 (Blackboard activities give students’ the chance to

read) rated the highest a mean of (3.51) followed by the logically presentation for those activities with a mean of (3.48) Meanwhile, the clearance of blended learning tasks are the lowest rated a mean (2.95)

Question 1: It is observed that 54 (41.4%) out of 130 respondents agreed that blackboard activities are presented logically And then some of them about 24 (18.5%) were undecided But, 9 (6.9%) were strongly disagree Based on the descriptive statistics, mean

of this item was (3.48) of the BB activities were presented logically Question 2: About half of the respondents are of opinion that 51 (39.2%) concluded that the blackboard activities give (me) the chance to read And about 27 (20.8%) were strongly agree Whereas 10 (7.7%) of them were strongly disagree to this item The mean is (3.52)

of that BB activities give (me) the chance to read

Question 3: 42 (32.3%) of the respondents said (agree) that blended learning activities are interactive And some of them around 31 (23.8%) were undecided But, 13 (10.0%) of respondents were strongly disagree The total mean of this item is (3.20) of blended learning activities are interactive

Question 4: About half of respondents 47 (36.2%) agreed that the blended learning makes

my English language skills better And 32 (24.6%) were undecided it up to the mark and 6 (4.6%) were strongly disagree The mean of this item is (3.45)

Question 5: As can be seen 42 (32.3%) of respondents reported agree that the blended learning is easy Then around 33 (25.4%) of respondents were strongly agree While 11 (8.5%) were disagree Mean of the item of the blended learning is easy, was (3.29)

Question 6: It showed that respondents of 44 (33.8 %) agreed that blended learning is collaborative and some of respondents about 34 (26.2%) were undecided While 14 (10.8) were strongly disagree The mean is (3.27) of the BL is collaborative Question 7: Most of respondents 54 (41.5%) concluded that the BL courses are useful and interesting, besides 28 (21.5%) disagreed but 10 (7.7%) strongly disagreed The mean is (3.22) of the BL courses are useful and interesting

Question 8: About 35 (26.9%) respondents agreed that BL enhances the interaction between teachers and students Only 32 (24.6%) were strongly agree But 13 (10%) were strongly disagree about that The total mean of this item is (3.35) of BL enhances the interaction between teachers and students

Question 9: It represented that 33 (25.4%) of respondents undecided that the Blended Learning tasks are clear,whereas 31 (23.8%) of them were disagree while 16 (12.3%) of respondents were strongly agreed The total mean of this item is (2.95) of the Blended Learning tasks are clear

Question 10: It revealed that 39 (30.0%) out of 130 respondent agree that B L gives (me) enough time to do (my) tasks, besides 34 (26.2%) of them showed undecided But 11 (8.5%) said strongly disagree The mean is (3.31) of the B L gives (me) enough time to do (my) tasks

Question 11: 37 (28.5.3%) of respondents were undecided if they can always learn from blackboard And then 35 (26.9%) of them were agreed But, 12 (9.2%) were strongly disagree The total mean of this item is (3.19) of blended learning activities are interactive Question 12: As can be seen 38 (29.2%) of respondents agreed if they can learn from Blackboard in their own style Then, some of respondents about 30 (23.1%) were undecided While 19 (14.6%) of respondents in both were strongly agree and disagree Mean of the item of that they can learn from Blackboard in their own style, was (3.11) Table 2 shows that majority of the respondents expressed their positive attitude towards blended learning for English courses This confirms the findings of some researchers that learners showed positive attitudes towards teaching and learning online This is in consonant with some previous studies such as (Aliweh, 2011; Adas & Wafa, 2011; Bendania, 2011; Akkoyunlu & Soylu, 2006) Undoubted, there are some students expressed their opinion as disagreement concerning taking part in blended learning process

as such This finding illustrates the students’ satisfaction with BL as it enhanced to improve English language skills and helps them to make English learning collaborative, interactive

and interesting In addition, this reflects the interaction between teachers and students, and gives them enough time to do their tasks

Table 3 follows the previous questionnaire items starting from (13-24) This domain is about negative impressions of blended learning for English course from students’ perception

Question 13: Most of respondents about 53 (40.8%) were strongly agreed that slow internet connectivity is a problem for BL, besides 41 (31.5%) of respondents agreed but 10 (7.7%) were strongly disagree The mean of this item is (3.88) that showed slow internet connectivity is a problem for BL

Question 14: Half of the respondents 50 (38.5%) were agreed that (My) teachers do not reply (my) emails quickly And 32 (24.6%) were undecided Whereas 10 (7.7%) were strongly disagree to it The mean of this item is (3.40) of that (My) teachers do not reply (my) emails quickly

Question 15: 36 (27.7%) of the respondents were undecided that BL materials aren’t well organized And then 31 (23.8%) agreed But, 12 (9.2%) were strongly disagree The total mean of this item is (3.26) of BL materials aren’t well organized Question 16: About 39 (30.0%) of respondents were undecided that the instructor isn’t on time for all activities And 29 (22.3%) were disagree it up to the mark and 14 (10.8%) were strongly disagree The mean of this item is (3.08)

Question 17: It showed that respondents of 36 (27.7%) agreed that BL is frustrating to use and 30 (23.1%) of respondents were disagreed While 14 (10.8) were strongly disagree The mean is (3.20) of that BL is frustrating to use

Question 18: It observed that 31 (23.8%) out of 130 respondents agreed that BL is a waste

of time And then 28 (21.5%) were strongly disagree But, 22 (16.9%) both were strongly agree and undecided Based on the descriptive statistics, mean of this item was (2.94) of that BL is a waste of time