[Home ] [Archive]   [ فارسی ]  
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit :: Contact ::
:: Volume 11, Issue 2 (7-2019) ::
rme 2019, 11(2): 54-63 Back to browse issues page
Comparing of the effect of Blended and Traditional teaching on Learning
H Najafi *
Department of Education, Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran , drhossiennajafi@yahoo.com
Abstract:   (395 Views)
Introduction: Since blended learning is a combination of the strengths of both traditional and electronic teaching methods, so the main purpose of this research is to compare the effect                of blended and traditional teaching on students´ learning  at Master´s degree in Payame Noor university.
Methods: This is an experimental research, by using pretest-posttest and control group based on LMS classroom. The population consisted of all the masters´ students of Shiraz Payame Noor University (PNU) in the first academic year of 2018-2019 (N=30) that were divided into experimental and control group via census sampling method (15 students in each group). Data   were analyzed by T-test and covariance (ANCOVA) through SPSS.
Results: Results indicated a significant difference between the experimental and control groups in pretest and posttest scores at the 0.05 level (F=7.756). In the final evaluation, the results indicated the superiority of the mean score of experimental group (14.0987) in blended teaching to control group in traditional instruction (12.9361).
Conclusion: Blended teaching because of combining the strengths of the two methods of traditional and e-learning, mental imagery, self-regulation and self-motivating learning in students can be more effective on the quality of learning in terms of maintaining and maintaining grades compared to traditional education.
Keywords: Traditional Teaching, e-learning, Comparison, Blended Methods, student
Full-Text [PDF 680 kb]   (171 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Educational technology, e-Learning,Virtual Education
References
1. Najafi H. [Introduction to Blended Learning].1th ed. Isfahan: Jahad University Press; 2017. [Persian]
2. Heydari N. [Important Indicators in Students' Academic Achievement Study Case Study on Meta-Cognitive Knowledge and Learning Strategies]. Journal of Psychology and Educational Sciences 2017; 3(2):53-67. [Persian]
3. Seyyed kalan SM, Maleki Avarsin S, Najafi H. [A Meta-Analysis of the Relationship between Emotional Intelligence and Academic Achievement in Persian Speakers Databases]. Journal of Instruction and Evaluation 2018; 10(40):129-149. [Persian]
4. Najafi H. [The Relationship between the Dimensions of Blended Learning and Learning Quality: A Case of PNU]. Information and Communication Technology in Educational Sciences 2017; 7(4(28)): 59-80. [Persian]
5. Javadi H, Baghchehsara E. [Blended Learning; Passing From Traditional and Electronic Learning]. Global Conference on Psychology and Education, Law and Social Sciences at the Beginning of the Third Millennium. 2016 May 19; Iran.Shiraz: civilica; 2016. [Persian]
6. Marsh D. Blended learning: Creating learning opportunities for language learners. 1th ed. New York: Cambridge University Press: Co.2003.
7. Garrison DR, Vaughan ND. Blended learning in higher Education: Framework, Principles and guide line. John Wiley & Sons; 2007. [DOI:10.1002/9781118269558]
8. Guzer B, Caner H. the past, present, and future of blended learning: an in depth analyses of literature. SO BEH SCI 2014; 116(8):4596-4603. [DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.992]
9. CeylanV, Kesici A. The Effect of blended Learning on Academic Success. Journal of human sicence 2017; 14(1): 121-132. [DOI:10.14687/jhs.v14i1.4141]
10. Driscoll M. Blended learning: Let's get beyond the hype. E-learning 2002 ;1(4):1-4
11. Behnke C. Blended learning in the culinary arts: Across the disciplines, across the academy. 2th ed. Sterling: Stylus Publishing: Co.2012.
12. Vitolina l. E-inclusion modeling for blended e-learning course. Procedia Computer Science 2015; 65:744-753. [DOI:10.1016/j.procs.2015.09.019]
13. Garrison DR, Kanuka H. Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The internet and higher education 2004;7(2):95-105. [DOI:10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001]
14. Drysdale J, Graham C, Spring K, & Halverson L. An analysis of research trends in dissertations and theses studying blended learning. The Internet and Higher Education 2003; 17(8): 90-100. [DOI:10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.11.003]
15. Ling Y, Yang l. Academic and learners, perceptions on blended learning as a strategic initiative to improve student learning experience. ENCON 2017; 14(2): 54-67.
16. Akgündüz D, Akınoğlu O. The Impact of Blended Learning and Social Media-Supported Learning on the Academic Success and Motivation of the Students in Science Education. Edu Sci 2017; 42(191): 69-90. [DOI:10.15390/EB.2017.6444]
17. VanDerLinden K. Blended learning as transformational institutional learning. New directions for higher education 2014;(165):75-85. [DOI:10.1002/he.20085]
18. Fink LD. Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to designing college courses. John Wiley & Sons; 2013.
19. Kezar A. How colleges change: Understanding, leading, and enacting change. 2thed. New York: Rutledge; 2013. [DOI:10.4324/9780203115060]
20. Ardid T, M Meseguer-D, Jaime Riera A. Online exams for blended assessment. Study of different application Methodologies. Computers & Education 2015; 81(7):296-303. [DOI:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.10.010]
21. Razavi SA. [New Issues in Educational Technology]. 2thed. Ahvaz: Shahid Chamran University; 2011. [Persian]
22. Najafi H. SCORM: [A model for the production of electronic content for better learning]. EDCBMJ 2017; 9(5): 335-350. [Persian]
23. Payame Noor University. [Cited 2018 Des28]. Available from: http://lms. pnu.ac.ir/login: PNU. [Persian]
24. Kazu I, Demirkol M. Effect of blended learning environment model on high school student Academic achievement. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology 2014; 13(1): 78-87.
25. Suda KJ, Sterling JM, Guirguis AB, Mathur SK. Student perception and academic performance after implementation of a blended learning approach to a drug information and literature evaluation course. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning 2014;6(3):367-72. [DOI:10.1016/j.cptl.2014.02.017]
26. Youde A. Tutor Emotional Competences Valued by Learners in a Blended Learning Contex. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning 2016;19(2):63-79. [DOI:10.1515/eurodl-2016-0008]
27. Çobanoglu A, Alton E. From traditional teaching to blended learning based education. Educational technologies 2015; 7(6): 89-107.
28. Kuo Y, Belland R, Schroder E, Walker E. K-12 teachers' perceptions of and their satisfaction with interaction type in blended learning environments. Distance Education 2014; 35(3):360-391. [DOI:10.1080/01587919.2015.955265]
29. Belens R, Vote M, De Waver B. The design of blended learning in response to student diversity in higher education: Instructors' views and use of differentiated instruction in blended learning. Computers & Education 2018; 120:197-212. [DOI:10.1016/j.compedu.2018.02.009]
30. Broadbent J. comparing online and blended learners self regulated learning strategies and academic performance .internet and higher education 2017; 33(7): 24-32. [DOI:10.1016/j.iheduc.2017.01.004]
Send email to the article author

Add your comments about this article
Your username or Email:

CAPTCHA


XML   Persian Abstract   Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Najafi H. Comparing of the effect of Blended and Traditional teaching on Learning. rme. 2019; 11 (2) :54-63
URL: http://rme.gums.ac.ir/article-1-753-en.html


Volume 11, Issue 2 (7-2019) Back to browse issues page
پژوهش در آموزش علوم پزشکی Research in Medical Education