Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Blended learning model on hands-on approach for in-service secondary school teachers: Combination of E-learning and face-to-face discussion

  • Published:
Education and Information Technologies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine the effectiveness of a blended learning model on hands-on approach for in-service secondary school teachers using a quasi-experimental design. A 24-h teacher-training course using the blended learning model was administered to 117 teachers, while face-to-face instruction was given to 60 teachers. The following dependent variables were compared: degree of leaners’ knowledge, self-efficacy and satisfaction with the training course. The results indicated that the experimental, blended learning group showed a significantly higher level of knowledge of hands-on approach and overall satisfaction with the course. However, the self-efficacy and others items related to learner’s learning satisfaction were similar between two groups. Moreover, the findings indicated that access, flexibility, cost effectiveness, improving interaction, formation of teacher network and involving of administrators, instructors and school leaders were factors which contributed to the success of blended learning model. Further implications and suggestions for the blended learning model are presented.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adcock, A. B., Dugan, M., Nelson, E., & Nickel, C. (2006). Teaching effective helping skills at a distance: the development of project CATHIE. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 7(4), 349–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aguirre, J., & Speer, N. M. (2000). Examining the relationship between beliefs and goals in teacher practice. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 18, 327–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Albion, P. (2001). Some factors in the development of self-efficacy beliefs for computer use among teacher education students. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 9, 321–347.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arbaugh, J. B. (2000). Virtual classroom characteristics and student satisfaction with internet- based MBA courses. Journal of Management Education, 24(1), 32–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arbaugh, J. B., & Duray, R. (2002). Technological and structural characteristics, student learning and satisfaction with web-based courses: an exploratory study of two online MBA programs. Management Learning, 33(3), 331–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Babenko-Mould, Y., Andrusyszyn, M. A., & Goldenberg, D. (2004). Effects of computer-based clinical conferencing on nursing students’ self-efficacy. Journal of Nursing Education, 43(4), 149–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barufakdi, J. P., & Swift, J. W. (1997). Children learning to read should experience science. The Reading Teacher, 30, 388–399.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borko, H., & Putnam, R. T. (1995). Expanding a teacher’s knowledge base: a cognitive psychological perspective on professional development. In Professional development in education: New paradigm and practices (pp. 35–65). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

  • Bunderson, C. V. (2003). Four frameworks for viewing blended learning cases: comments and critique. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 4(3), 279–288.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butrymowicz, S. (2012). Is online teacher training good for teacher education. In The Hechinger Report, Times US Inc, Friday, June 29 2012 [online] Available at: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2118396,00.html (accessed on 10/15/2013).

  • Byers, C. (2001). Interactive assessment: an approach to enhance teaching and learning. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 12(4), 359–374.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, C., Ramondt, L., & Smiley, G. (2005). Strong community, deep learning: exploring the link. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 42(3), 217–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charalambos, V., Michalinos, Z., & Chamberlain, R. (2004). The design of online learning communities: critical issues. Educational Media International, 41(2), 135–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curtis, L., & Swenson, P. (2003). Hybrid courses plus: Blending F2F, online and handheld computer for effective learning. In C. Crawford et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference, 2003 (pp. 520–523). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

  • Donnelly, R. (2010). Harmonizing technology with interaction in blended problem-based learning. Journal of Computers & Education, 54(2), 350–359. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.08.012. accessed on 09/15/2013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dziuban, C. D., Hartman, J. L., & Moskal, P. D. (2004). Blended learning. Educause Center for Applied Research, 7, 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dziuban, C. D., Hartman, J., Juge, F., Moskal, P., & Sorg, S. (2006). Blended learning enters the mainstream. In C. J. Bonk & C. R. Graham (Eds.), Handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs (pp. 195–208). San Francisco: Pfeiffer Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • EL-Deghaidy, H., & Nouby, A. (2008). Effectiveness of a blended e-learning cooperative approach in an Egyptian teacher education programme. Journal of Computers & Education, 51(3), 988–1006. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360131507001273 (accessed on 09/10/2013).

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2011). Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles, and guidelines (pp. 20–50). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham, C. R. (2005). Blended learning systems: Definition, current trends, and future directions. In C. J. Bonk & C. R. Graham (Eds.), Handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs (pp. 3–21). San Francisco: Peiffer Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham, C. R. (2013). Emerging practice and research in blended learning. In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of distance education (3rd ed., pp. 333–350). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene, J., & Caracelli, V. (1997). Defining and describing the paradigm issue in mixed-method evaluation. New Directions for Evaluation, 74, 5–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halverson, L. R., Graham, C. R., Spring, K. J., Drysdale, J. S., & Henrie, C. R. (2014). A thematic analysis of the most highly cited scholarship in the first decade of blended learning research. The Internet and Higher Education, 20, 20–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harriman, G. (2004). What is blended learning? E-Learning Resources. http://www.grayharriman.com/blended_learning.htm (accessed on 11/15/2013).

  • Ho, V.T., Nakamori, Y. Ho, T.B. Ho, S.D. (2013). Study on study on a model for teacher professional development in Vietnam based on knowledge management. In: Proceeding of the 57 th International Society for the Systems Sciences Conference.

  • Holmes, A., Polhemus, L., & Jennings, S. (2005). CATIE: a blended approach to situated professional development. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32(4), 381–394. doi:10.2190/F97W-QUJ4-G7YG-FPXC. accessed on 11/15/2013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keengwe, J., & Kang, K. K. (2012). Blended learning in teacher preparation programs: a literature review. International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education, 8(2), 81–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, M., Lyng, C., McGrath, M., & Cannon, G. (2009). A multi-method study to determine the effectiveness of, and student attitudes. Nurse Education Today, 29(3), 292–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, K. P. (2002). Identifying success in online teacher education and professional development. The Journal of Internet and Higher Education, 5, 231–246. doi:10.1016/S1096-7516(02)00104-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kupetz, R., & Ziegenmeyer, B. (2005). Blended learning in a teacher training course: integrated interactive e-learning and contact learning. ReCALL, 17(2), 179–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liang, C.-P., & She, H.-C. (2006). The effects of constructivist-oriented web-based science learning on middle school students “force” concept learning. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 14(5), 493–516. http://www.fed.cuhk.edu.hk/en/cjse/200600140005/0493.htm (accessed on 11/15/2013).

  • Macedo-Rouet, M., Ney, M., Charles, S., & Lallich-Boidin, G. (2009). Students’ performance and satisfaction with Web vs. paper-based practice quizzes and lecture notes. Journal of Computers & Education, 53, 375–384. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.02.013. accessed on 11/15/2013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2009). Evaluation of evidence- based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. Washington: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Education and Training (2011). Decision No 6120/QĐ-BGDĐT, dated 29/11/2011, on the implementation for hands-on approach in secondary schools, period 2011–2015.

  • Motteram, G. (2006). ‘Blended’ education and the transformation of teachers: a long-term case study in postgraduate UK Higher Education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 37(1), 17–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, M., & Trigwell, K. (2005). Can ‘blended learning’ be redeemed? E-learning, 2(1), 17–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osguthorpe, R. T., & Graham, C. R. (2003). Blended learning environments: definitions and directions. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 4, 227–233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Owston, R. D., Sinclair, M., & Wideman, H. (2008). Blended learning for professional development: an evaluation of a program for middle school mathematics and science teachers. Teachers College Record, 110(5), 1033–1064.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rigby, L., Wilson, I., Baker, J., Walton, T., Price, O., Dunne, K., et al. (2012). The development and evaluation of a ‘blended’ enquiry based learning model for mental health nursing students: “making your experience count”. Nurse Education Today, 32, 303–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russell, M., Carey, R., Kleiman, G., & Venable, J. (2009). Face-to-face and online professional development for mathematics teachers: a comparative study. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 13(2), 71–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saunders, G., & Klemming, F. (2003). Integrating technology into a traditional learning environment: reasons for and risks of success. Active Learning in Higher Education, 4(1), 74–86. doi:10.1177/1469787403004001006. accessed on 11/15/2013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shea, P., & Bidjerano, T. (2010). Learning presence: towards a theory of self-efficacy, self-regulation, and the development of a communities of inquiry in online and blended learning environments. Journal of Computers & Education, 55, 1721–1731.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shymansky, J. A., & Penick, J. E. (1981). Teacher behaviour does make a difference in hands on science classrooms. Journal of School Science and Mathematics, 81(5), 412–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smyth, S., Houghton, C., Cooney, A., & Casey, D. (2012). Students’ experiences of blended learning across a range of postgraduate programmes. Nurse Education Today, 32, 464–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, V. (2012). Three fears about blended learning, The Washington Post. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/three-fears-about-blended-learning/2012/09/22/56af57cc-035d-11e2-91e7-2962c74e7738_blog.html (accessed on 10/10/2013).

  • Twigg, C. A. (2003). Improving learning and reducing costs: new models for online learning. Educause Review, 38(5), 28–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ugur, B., Akkoyunlu, B., & Kurbanoglu, S. (2011). Students’ opinions on blended learning and its implementation in terms of their learning styles. Education and Information Technologies, 16(1), 5–23. doi:10.1007/s10639-009-9109-9. accessed on 10/25/2013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voogt, J., Almekinders, M., van den Akke, J., & Monen, B. (2005). A blended in-service arrangement for classroom technology integration: impacts on teachers and students. Computers in Human Behavior, 21(3), 523–539. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2004.10.003. accessed on 10/15/2013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vrasidas, C., & Zembylas, M. (2004). Online professional development lessons from the field. Education and Training, 46(6–7), 326–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woltering, V., Herrler, A., Spitzer, K., & Spreckelsen, C. (2009). Blended learning positively affects students’ satisfaction and the role of the tutor in the problem-based learning process: results of a mixed-method evaluation. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 14(5), 725–738. doi:10.1007/s10459-009-9154-6. accessed on 09/15/2013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Worth, K., Duque, M., Saltiel, E. (2009). Designing and implementing inquiry-based science units for primary education. La main à la pâté foundation. pp.9-20. http://lamapinternational.free.fr/Documents/Guide_Designing%20and%20implementing%20IBSE_final_light.pdf. accessed on 14/2/2014.

  • Young, A., & Lewis, C. W. (2008). Teacher education programmes delivered at a distance: an examination of distance student perceptions. Journal of Teaching & Teacher Education, 24(3), 601–609. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2007.03.003. accessed on 10/15/2013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thanks the MOET, DSE, DOETs, HNUE, HCE, VVOB, and JAIST for financially supporting and collaborating in this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, 1-1 Asahidai, Nomi, Ishikawa Prefecture, 923-1211, Japan

    Vinh-Thang Ho, Yoshiteru Nakamori & Tu-Bao Ho

  2. The Hong Kong Institute of Education, 10 Lo Ping Road, Tai Po, New Territories, Hong Kong

    Cher Ping Lim

Authors
  1. Vinh-Thang Ho
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yoshiteru Nakamori
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tu-Bao Ho
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Cher Ping Lim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vinh-Thang Ho.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ho, VT., Nakamori, Y., Ho, TB. et al. Blended learning model on hands-on approach for in-service secondary school teachers: Combination of E-learning and face-to-face discussion. Educ Inf Technol 21, 185–208 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-014-9315-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-014-9315-y

Keyword

Search

Navigation