Research Article

Graduate Students’ Experiences in a Blended Learning Program in Kazakhstan: A Mixed-Method Study Employing Interaction Equivalency Theorem

Gulmira Tussupbekova 1 , Kathy L. Malone 1 2 * , Janet Helmer 1 , Gulnara Namyssova 1 , Miruyert Abdrakhmanova 1 , Filiz Polat 1 , Zumrad Kataeva 1
More Detail
1 Graduate School of Education, Nazarbayev University, Nur-Sultan, KAZAKHSTAN2 University of Hawai'i at Hilo, Hilo, USA* Corresponding Author
Contemporary Educational Technology, 14(4), October 2022, ep386, https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/12398
Published: 26 August 2022
OPEN ACCESS   2014 Views   1392 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

This explanatory sequential mixed-method study explored the effectiveness of blended learning (BL) courses offered to graduate students at an English medium university in Kazakhstan. The study’s purpose was to explore and understand graduate students’ experiences while enrolled in BL courses by learning their perceptions of the benefits and challenges of BL, as well as its potential for enhancing their teacher leadership skills. A survey (n=81) and semi-structured individual interviews (n=17) were used as the main research instruments. This allowed for a detailed and rich data set on the conceptual underpinnings of the BL courses, their effectiveness, and their potential to inform higher education institutions towards implementing BL policies and practices, specifically in the field of education. Through the lens of the Interaction equivalency theorem, we analyzed students’ experiences and their interactions with their teachers and peers, as well as the mode, place, and pace of learning. This investigation revealed that the benefits of learning using BL outweighed its challenges. However, most of the participants preferred the face-to-face part of the BL course over its online teacher-student interaction component due to the opportunity to gain immediate feedback. Most importantly, the BL courses facilitated the enhancement of teacher leadership skills among the students. Finally, the paper provides recommendations for further development and revisions to current BL courses to enhance their learning value.
Keywords: blended learning, higher education, graduate students, educational leadership, interaction equivalency theory, Kazakhstan, teacher leadership

CITATION (APA)

Tussupbekova, G., Malone, K. L., Helmer, J., Namyssova, G., Abdrakhmanova, M., Polat, F., & Kataeva, Z. (2022). Graduate Students’ Experiences in a Blended Learning Program in Kazakhstan: A Mixed-Method Study Employing Interaction Equivalency Theorem. Contemporary Educational Technology, 14(4), ep386. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/12398

REFERENCES

  1. Acree, L., Gibson, T., Mangum, N., Wolf, M. A., Kellogg, S., & Branon, S. (2017). Supporting school leaders in blended learning with blended learning. Journal of Online Learning Research, 3(2), 105-143. https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/171355/
  2. Adams, A., & Ross, D. D. (2014). Clinical partnership at a distance: A design that transforms teaching and leadership. Peabody Journal of Education, 89(4), 533-546. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2014.939007
  3. Alabdulkarim, L. (2021). University health sciences students rating for a blended learning course framework. Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences, 28(9), 5379-5385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjbs.2021.05.059
  4. Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2015). Grade level: Tracking online education in the United States. Babson Survey Research Group. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED572778.pdf
  5. Anderson, T. (2003). Getting the mix right again: An updated and theoretical rationale for Interaction. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 4(2), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v4i2.149
  6. Aytac, T. (2009). The influence of blended learning model on developing leadership skills of school administrators. UbiCC Journal, 4(3), 538-543.
  7. Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Schmid, R. F., Tamim, R. M., & Abrami, P. C. (2014). A meta-analysis of blended learning and technology use in higher education: From the general to the applied. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 26(1), 87-122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-013-9077-3
  8. Birgili, B., Seggie, F. N., & Oguz, E. (2021). The trends and outcomes of flipped learning research between 2012 and 2018: A descriptive content analysis. Journal of Computers in Education, 8, 365-394. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-021-00183-y
  9. Bouilheres, F., Le, L. T. V. H., McDonald, S., Nkhoma, C., & Jandug-Montera, L. (2020). Defining student learning experience through blended learning. Education and Information Technologies, 25(4), 3049-3069. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10100-y
  10. Broadbent, J. (2017). Comparing online and blended learner’s self-regulated learning strategies and academic performance. The Internet and Higher Education, 33, 24-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2017.01.004
  11. Chen, P. S. D., Lambert, A. D., & Guidry, K. R. (2010). Engaging online learners: The impact of web-based learning technology on college student engagement. Computers & Education, 54(4), 1222-1232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.11.008
  12. Chiu, T. K. (2021). Digital support for student engagement in blended learning based on self-determination theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 124, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106909
  13. Clark, C. E. J., & Post, G. (2021). Preparation and synchronous participation improve student performance in a blended learning experience. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 37(3), 187-199. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.6811
  14. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research methods in education. Routledge.
  15. de Brito Lima, F., Lautert, S. L., & Gomes, A. S. (2021). Contrasting levels of student engagement in blended and non-blended learning scenarios. Computers & Education, 172, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104241
  16. Gallego-Arrufat, M. J., Gutiérrez-Santiuste, E., & Campaña-Jiménez, R. L. (2015). Online distributed leadership: A content analysis of interaction and teacher reflections on computer-supported learning. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 24(1), 81-99. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2013.814585
  17. Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2013). Institutional change and leadership associated with blended learning innovation: Two case studies. The Internet and Higher Education, 18, 24-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.09.001
  18. Harmeet Kaur, K. (2020). Effectiveness of blended learning for teaching cardiac disorders on nursing students’ learning outcomes and attitude. International Journal of Scientific Research, 9(1), 16-17. https://doi.org/10.36106/ijsr
  19. Holmes, K. A., & Prieto-Rodriguez, E. (2018). Student and staff perceptions of a learning management system for blended learning in teacher education. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 43(3), 2. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2018v43n3.2
  20. Honebein, P. C., & Reigeluth, C. M. (2021). Making good design judgments via the instructional theory framework. In J. K. MacDonald, & R. E. West (Eds.) Design for learning. BYU Open Textbook Network. https://open.byu.edu/id
  21. Lee, C. Y. (2020). How to improve the effectiveness of blended learning of pharmacology and pharmacotherapy? A case study in pharmacy program. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 25(4), 977-988. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-020-09447-5
  22. Lightner, C. A., & Lightner-Laws, C. A. (2016). A blended model: Simultaneously teaching a quantitative course traditionally, online, and remotely. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(1), 224-238. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2013.841262
  23. Lin, C. Y., & Reigeluth, C. M. (2021). Guidance for wiki-supported collaborative learning and community knowledge building for an entire class: Enhancing learning environments during the COVID-19 pandemic. Revista de Educación a Distancia [Distance Education Magazine], 64(21), 1. https://doi.org/10.6018/red.447401
  24. Lin, L. (2018). Student learning and engagement in a blended environment: A mixed methods study. In I. Bouchrika, N. Harrati, & P. Vu (Eds.), Learner experience and usability in online education (256-269). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-4206-3.ch010
  25. Manwaring, K. C., Larsen, R., Graham, C. R., Henrie, C. R., & Kaur, L. R. (2017). Investigating student engagement in blended learning settings using experience sampling and structural equation modeling. The Internet and Higher Education, 35, 21-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2017.06.002
  26. Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., & Baki, M. (2013). The effectiveness of online and blended learning: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Teachers College Record, 115(3), 1-47. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811311500307
  27. Mehall, S. (2022). Comparing in-class scenario-based learning to scenario based eLearning through an interactive, self-paced case study. Journal of Education for Business, 97(5), 305-311. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2021.1943294
  28. Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. John Wiley & Sons.
  29. Merrill, M. D. (2017). If content is king then e3 instruction is queen. In F. Q. Lai, & J. Lehman (Eds.) Learning and knowledge analytics in open education (pp. 172-192). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-38956-1_14
  30. Merrill, M. D. (2018). Using the first principles of instruction to make instruction effective, efficient, and engaging. In R.E. West (Ed.) Foundations of learning and instructional design technology: Historical roots and current trends. BYU Open Textbook Network.
  31. Miyazoe, T., & Anderson, T. (2010). Empirical research on learners’ perceptions: Interaction equivalency theorem in blended learning. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 1, 1-9.
  32. Moussa-Inaty, J. (2017). Student experiences of a blended learning environment. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 16(9), 60-72. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.16.9.5
  33. Müller, C., & Mildenberger, T. (2021). Facilitating flexible learning by replacing classroom time with an online learning environment: A systematic review of blended learning in higher education. Educational Research Review, 34(2021), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2021.100394
  34. Namyssova, G., Tussupbekova, G., Helmer, J., Malone, K., Afzal, M., & Jonbekova, D. (2019). Challenges and benefits of blended learning in higher education: A case of Kazakhstan. International Journal of Technology in Education, 2(1), 22-31. https://www.ijte.net/index.php/ijte/article/view/6
  35. Owston, R., York, D., & Murtha, S. (2013). Student perceptions and achievement in a university blended learning strategic initiative. The Internet and Higher Education, 18, 38-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.12.003
  36. Ozsari, G., & Aydin, C.H. (2021). Interaction preferences of distance learners in Turkey, open learning. The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2021.1981279
  37. Padilla Rodriguez, B. C., & Armellini, A. (2014). Applying the interaction equivalency theorem to online courses in a large organization. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 13(2), 51-66.
  38. Pechenkina, E., Scardamaglia, A., & Gregory, J. (2018). “It’s the combination that works”: Evaluating student experiences with a multi-element blended design in first-year law. Contemporary Educational Technology, 9(4), 405-422. https://doi.org/10.30935/cet.471019
  39. Pima, J. K. M., Iqbal, R., Odetayo, M., & Sedoyeka, E. (2018). A thematic review of blended learning in higher education. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, 10(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJMBL.2018010101
  40. Prifti, R. (2020). Self–efficacy and student satisfaction in the context of blended learning courses. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 37(2) 111-125. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2020.1755642
  41. Raes, A., Detienne, L., Windey, I., & Depaepe, F. (2020). A systematic literature review on synchronous hybrid learning: Gaps identified. Learning Environments Research, 23(3), 269-290. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-019-09303-z
  42. Rahman, N. A. A., Hussein, N., & Aluwi, A. H. (2015). Satisfaction on blended learning in a public higher education institution: What factors matter? Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 211, 768-775. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.107
  43. Rasheed, R. A., Kamsin, A., & Abdullah, N. A. (2020). Challenges in the online component of blended learning: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 144, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103701
  44. Rhode, J. F. (2007). E-learning interaction matrix. http://www.jasonrhode.com/interactionmatrix
  45. 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
  46. Smyth, S., Houghton, C., Cooney, A., & Casey, D. (2012). Students’ experiences of blended learning across a range of postgraduate programmes. Nurse Education Today, 32(4), 464-468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2011.05.014
  47. Spring, K. J., & Graham, C. R. (2017). Thematic patterns in international blended learning literature, research, practices, and terminology. Online Learning, 21(4), 337-361. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v21i4.998
  48. Staker, H., & Horn, B., M. (2012). Classifying K-12 blended learning. Innosight Institute.
  49. Tang, H. (2021). Teaching teachers to use technology through massive open online course: Perspectives of interaction equivalency. Computers & Education, 174, 104307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104307
  50. Tanveer, M. (2011). Integrating e-learning in classroom-based language teaching: Perceptions, challenges and strategies. In Proceedings of the International Conference “ICT for Language Learning.”
  51. Trust, T., & Horrocks, B. (2017). “I never feel alone in my classroom”: Teacher professional growth within a blended community of practice. Professional Development in Education, 43(4), 645-665. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2016.1233507
  52. Tucker, C. R. (2012). Blended learning in grades 4–12: Leveraging the power of technology to create student-centered classrooms. Corwin Press.
  53. Tyler, B., & Abdrakhmanova, M. (2016). Flipping the CS1 and CS2 classrooms in Central Asia. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (pp. 1-5). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2016.7757739
  54. Wang, M. T., & Degol, J. (2014). Staying engaged: Knowledge and research needs in student engagement. Child Development Perspectives, 8(3), 137-143. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12073
  55. Yılmaz, Ö., & Malone, K. L. (2020). Preservice teachers perceptions about the use of blended learning in a science education methods course. Smart Learning Environments, 7(1), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-020-00126-7
  56. Zhu, M., Berri, S., & Zhang, K. (2021). Effective instructional strategies and technology use in blended learning: A case study. Education and Information Technologies, 26, 6143-6161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10544-w