Learning achievement in purposive communication of ESL college students: A blended learning approach
Abstract
With the ongoing studies of blended learning in different areas, the study contrasts blended learning with online classes by analyzing pre/post-test scores, grades, and activity scores, indicating blended learning might offer superior outcomes. Additionally, it explores college students’ experiences in a blended learning class, providing insights into its effectiveness and areas for improvement. Participants are engineering students from Camarines Sur Polytechnic Colleges, Camarines Sur, Philippines, which includes 45 participants for each group (controlled and experimental groups). The study was based on a triangulation approach of integrating Independent Samples T-test and Multiple Regression Analysis for quantitative data and semi-structured interviews for qualitative insights. Accordingly, certain activities were crucial in improving non-verbal communication, persuasive writing, and research skills that led to confidence build-up and improved students’ performances. Narrative descriptions give more enlightening information about boosted confidence and better presentation competence due to better communication skills. Writing skills go a long way in improving students’ academic achievement, and Research and writing practices are essential skills that help students achieve higher grades. Integrating the qualitative narratives and quantitative results adds credibility to the study since it gives a different perspective on the blended learning environment. The recommendations to instructors and instructional designers call for blending unique instruction methods, multimedia content, and individualized feedback options. It is also advised to make pedagogical revisions for less impactful activities and provide customized exercises to build student confidence. Finally, this study illustrates the transformative capabilities of blended learning to enhance ESL teaching practice. The insights deepen pedagogue practices and broadly contribute to ongoing discussions around effective ESL education strategies toward better learning.
References
Alammary, A., Sheard, J., & Carbone, A. (2014). Blended learning in higher education: Three different design approaches. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 30(4). https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.693
Anderson, T., & Rivera-Vargas, P. (2020). A Critical look at Educational Technology from a Distance Education Perspective. Digital Education Review, 37, 208–229. https://doi.org/10.1344/der.2020.37.208-229
Block, B. M., Haus, B., Steenken, A., & Von Geyso, T. (2021). Digital transformation of interdisciplinary engineering education. In: Educating Engineers for Future Industrial Revolutions. Springer International Publishing.
Brown, H. M., Johnson, A. M., Smyth, R. E., et al. (2014). Exploring the persuasive writing skills of students with high-functioning autism spectrum disorder. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 8(11), 1482–1499. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2014.07.017
Brown, S. (2022). High School Teacher Self-Efficacy in Using Blended Learning and TPACK [PhD thesis]. Walden University.
Chang, C.-L., & Fang, M. (2020). E-Learning and Online Instructions of Higher Education during the 2019 Novel Coronavirus Diseases (COVID-19) Epidemic. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1574(1), 012166. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1574/1/012166
Chapelle, C. A. (2016). Teaching culture in introductory foreign language textbooks. Palgrave Macmillan.
De Gale, S., & Boisselle, L. N. (2015). The Effect of POGIL on Academic Performance and Academic Confidence. Science Education International, 26(1), 56-79.
Doppelt, Y. (2003). Implementation and assessment of project-based learning in a flexible environment. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 13, 255-272.
Dugard, P., & Todman, J. (1995). Analysis of Pre‐test‐Post‐test Control Group Designs in Educational Research. Educational Psychology, 15(2), 181–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144341950150207
Dziuban, C., Graham, C. R., Moskal, P. D., et al. (2018). Blended learning: the new normal and emerging technologies. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0087-5
Finlay, M. J., Tinnion, D. J., & Simpson, T. (2022). A virtual versus blended learning approach to higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic: The experiences of a sport and exercise science student cohort. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 30, 100363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhlste.2021.100363
Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001
Gay, G. (2018). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. Teachers College Press.
Gopalan, M., Rosinger, K., & Ahn, J. B. (2020). Use of Quasi-Experimental Research Designs in Education Research: Growth, Promise, and Challenges. Review of Research in Education, 44(1), 218–243. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732x20903302
Guo, C., Yan, X., & Li, Y. (2020). Prediction of Student Attitude towards Blended Learning Based on Sentiment Analysis. In: Proceedings of the 2020 9th International Conference on Educational and Information Technology.
Hodges, C. B., Moore, S., Lockee, B. B., et al. (2020). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. The Voice of the Higher Education Technology Community.
Johnson, B. T., Killeya, L. A., Smith-McLallen, A., & Levin, K. D. (2004). Truth or consequences: Overcoming resistance to persuasion with positive thinking. In Resistance and persuasion. Psychology Press.
Johnson, K. V. (2019). Factors that Influence Student and Teacher Success in a Blended Learning Environment. Immaculata University.
Johnson, A. L., & Lockee, B. B. (2018). Self-efficacy research in online learning. In: Self-efficacy in Instructional Technology Contexts. Springer Cham.
Kolb, D. A. (2014). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. FT press.
Li, S., & Wang, W. (2022). Effect of blended learning on student performance in K‐12 settings: A meta‐analysis. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 38(5), 1254–1272. Portico. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12696
Lombard, M., Snyder-Duch, J., & Bracken, C. C. (2010). Intercoder reliability. Retrieved February.
Means, A. (2018). Learning to save the future: Rethinking education and work in an era of digital capitalism. Routledge.
Pereira, D., Cadime, I., Brown, G., et al. (2022). How do undergraduates perceive the use of assessment? A study in higher education. European Journal of Higher Education, 12(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/21568235.2020.1871393
Ponce, O. A., & Pagán-Maldonado, N. (2015). Mixed Methods Research in Education: Capturing the Complexity of the Profession. International Journal of Educational Excellence, 1(1), 111–135. https://doi.org/10.18562/ijee.2015.0005
Rasheed, R. A., Kamsin, A., & Abdullah, N. A. (2020). Challenges in the online component of blended learning: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 144, 103701. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103701
Sánchez-Gómez, M. C., Martín-García, A. V., & Mena, J. (2019). Teachers’ beliefs towards blended learning in higher education: A mixed-methods study. In: Proceedings of the Learning Technology for Education Challenges: 8th International Workshop (LTEC 2019).
Sedgwick, P. (2010). Independent samples t test. BMJ, 340(may18 2), c2673–c2673. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c2673
Smith, D. G. (2020). Diversity’s promise for higher education: Making it work. JHU Press.
Smith, P. J., Murphy, K. L., & Mahoney, S. E. (2003). Towards Identifying Factors Underlying Readiness for Online Learning: An Exploratory Study. Distance Education, 24(1), 57–67. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587910303043
Stolzenberg, R. M. (2004). Multiple regression analysis. In: Handbook of Data Analysis. SAGE Publications Ltd.
Shadish, W. R., & Luellen, J. K. (2012). Quasi-experimental design. In Handbook of complementary methods in education research. Routledge.
Sharma, G. R. (2014). Should curriculum be universalized or contextualized. In: A seminar paper in Curriculum and Instruction. ERIC.
Siemens, G. (2004). Elearnspace. In: Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. Elearnspace.
Smith, K., & Hill, J. (2019). Defining the nature of blended learning through its depiction in current research. Higher Education Research & Development, 38(2), 383–397. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2018.1517732
Taylor, C. S., & Nolen, S. B. (1996). A contextualized approach to teaching teachers about classroom-based assessment. Educational Psychologist, 31(1), 77-88.
Torrisi-Steele, G., & Drew, S. (2013). The literature landscape of blended learning in higher education: the need for better understanding of academic blended practice. International Journal for Academic Development, 18(4), 371–383. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144x.2013.786720
Vaughan, N. (2014). Student Engagement and Blended Learning: Making the Assessment Connection. Education Sciences, 4(4), 247–264. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci4040247
Villanueva, J. A. R., Redmond, P., Galligan, L., et al. (2023). Investigating blended learning interactions in Philippine schools through the community of inquiry framework. Asia Pacific Education Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-023-09826-4
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). The Role of Play in Development. Harvard University Press.
Walvoord, B. E., & Anderson, V. J. (2011). Effective grading: A tool for learning and assessment in college. John Wiley & Sons.
Wang, S., & Chen, Y. (2018, June). Rain classroom: A tool for blended learning with MOOCs. In: Proceedings of the fifth annual ACM conference on learning at scale.
Zhang, S., Liu, Q., Chen, W., et al. (2017). Interactive networks and social knowledge construction behavioral patterns in primary school teachers’ online collaborative learning activities. Computers & Education, 104, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.10.011
Copyright (c) 2024 Marlon S. Pontillas
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The author(s) warrant that permission to publish the article has not been previously assigned elsewhere.
Author(s) shall retain the copyright of their work and grant the Journal/Publisher right for the first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under:
OA - Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0). This license allows for the copying, distribution and transmission of the work, provided the correct attribution of the original creator is stated. Adaptation and remixing are also permitted.
This broad license intends to facilitate free access to, as well as the unrestricted reuse of, original works of all types.
_%E5%89%AF%E6%9C%AC1.png){kind=logo}
