• Abstract

    This study investigates the factors affecting Grade 6 students' learning experiences within the B-Learning model in the Vietnamese educational context. Blended learning, combining traditional face-to-face instruction with online components, has become increasingly significant in Vietnam's evolving educational landscape. The research explores the impact of technological access, self-engagement behaviors, and support mechanisms on Grade 6 students' learning within this innovative framework. The prevalence and proficiency with digital tools, particularly Tablets or iPads, are examined to understand their influence on students' engagement with online components. Additionally, the study delves into self-engagement behaviors, including goal-setting and time management, aiming to uncover correlations with academic performance. Furthermore, familial, peer, and teacher support structures are explored to comprehend their role in students' adaptability to the B-Learning model. The findings aim to provide nuanced insights for Vietnamese educators, policymakers, and researchers, facilitating the refinement of blended learning practices to better cater to the specific needs and challenges of Grade 6 students in Vietnam's educational milieu.

  • References

    1. Alahmari, A. A. (2019). A mixed methods study of the implementation of collaborative technology tools for enhancing collaboration and student engagement in online learning: Faculty experiences and student perspectives. Illinois State University.
    2. Ali, W. (2018). Transforming higher education landscape with hybrid/blended approach as an evolving paradigm. Journal of Advances in Social Science Humanities, 3(7), 143-169.
    3. Almulla, M. A. (2022). Investigating important elements that affect students’ readiness for and practical use of teaching methods in Higher Education. Sustainability, 15(1), 653. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15010653
    4. Alshuraiaan, A. (2023). Exploring the relationship between teacher-student interaction patterns and language learning outcomes in TESOL classrooms. Journal of English Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics, 5(3), 25-34. https://doi.org/10.32996/jetal.2023.5.3.3
    5. Anthonysamy, L., Koo, A. C., & Hew, S. H. (2020). Self-regulated learning strategies in higher education: Fostering digital literacy for sustainable lifelong learning. Education Information Technologies, 25(4), 2393-2414. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10201-8
    6. Azouri, M., & Karam, J. (2023). From In-Person to Hybrid Learning Mode. In Governance in Higher Education: Global Reform and Trends in the MENA Region (pp. 61-88). Springer.
    7. Bower, M., Dalgarno, B., Kennedy, G. E., Lee, M. J., & Kenney, J. (2015). Design and implementation factors in blended synchronous learning environments: Outcomes from a cross-case analysis. Computers Education, 86, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.03.006
    8. Britt, T. W., Dickinson, J. M., Greene-Shortridge, T. M., & McKibben, E. S. (2007). Self-engagement at work. Positive Organizational Behavior, 143-158.
    9. Caena, F., & Redecker, C. (2019). Aligning teacher competence frameworks to 21st century challenges: The case for the European Digital Competence Framework for Educators (Digcompedu). European Journal of Education, 54(3), 356-369. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12345
    10. Camino, R., Bolaños, J., Kamidon, S., Marquez, A. L., Sembao, N., & Asa, J. (2023). Navigating the Pedagogical Landscape: A Study of College Instructors' Lived Experiences in Implementing the Blended Learning Modality. Psychology Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 15(8), 744-755. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10373849
    11. Carswell, A. D., & Venkatesh, V. (2002). Learner outcomes in an asynchronous distance education environment. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 56(5), 475-494. https://doi.org/10.1006/ijhc.2002.1004
    12. Chang, B. L., Bakken, S., Brown, S. S., Houston, T. K., Kreps, G. L., Kukafka, R., . . . Stavri, P. Z. (2004). Bridging the digital divide: reaching vulnerable populations. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 11(6), 448-457. https://doi.org/10.1197/jamia.M1535
    13. Clark, I. (2012). Formative assessment: Assessment is for self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology Review, 24, 205-249. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-011-9191-6
    14. Council, N. R. (1999). How people learn: Bridging research and practice. National Academies Press.
    15. Crespo, S. (2003). Learning to pose mathematical problems: Exploring changes in preservice teachers' practices. Educational studies in Mathematics, 52, 243-270. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024364304664
    16. Dean, A., & Lima, A. (2022). Student experience of e-learning tools in he: An integrated learning framework. Humanities Today: Proceedings, 1(1), 29-47. https://doi.org/10.26417/ejser.v11i2.p39-51
    17. Falloon, G. (2020). From digital literacy to digital competence: the teacher digital competency (TDC) framework. Educational Technology Research Development, 68(5), 2449-2472. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09767-4
    18. Gagnon, K., Young, B., Bachman, T., Longbottom, T., Severin, R., & Walker, M. J. (2020). Doctor of physical therapy education in a hybrid learning environment: reimagining the possibilities and navigating a “new normal”. Physical Therapy, 100(8), 1268-1277. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/pzaa096
    19. Gillen, A. L., Grohs, J. R., Matusovich, H. M., & Kirk, G. R. (2021). A multiple case study of an interorganizational collaboration: Exploring the first year of an industry partnership focused on middle school engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 110(3), 545-571. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20403
    20. Green, M. (2019). Smartphones, distraction narratives, and flexible pedagogies: Students’ mobile technology practices in networked writing classrooms. Computers Composition, 52, 91-106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2019.01.009
    21. i Negre, L. R., Ramon, M. R. R., & Gelabert, S. V. (2023). Challenges and opportunities of non-face-to-face higher education for university students with and without diverse educational needs. Revista de Investigación en Educación, 21(3), 366-385.
    22. Jin, X., Kim, E., Kim, K.-c., & Chen, S. (2023). Innovative Knowledge Generation: Exploring Trends in the Use of Early Childhood Education Apps in Chinese Families. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 1-40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-023-01585-2
    23. Jun, F., & Pow, J. (2011). Fostering digital literacy through web-based collaborative inquiry learning–A case study. Journal of Information Technology Education. Innovations in Practice, 10, 57-71.
    24. Kettle, M. (2017). International student engagement in higher education: Transforming practices, pedagogies and participation. Multilingual Matters.
    25. Khan, A. I., Al-Shihi, H., Al-Khanjari, Z. A., & Sarrab, M. (2015). Mobile Learning (M-Learning) adoption in the Middle East: Lessons learned from the educationally advanced countries. Telematics and Informatics, 32(4), 909-920. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2015.04.005
    26. Kianmehr, L., & Kamali, A. (2013). Correlates of Learning Behaviors and Performance Outcomes in e-Learning. Proceedings of the Information Systems Educators Conference ISSN,
    27. Kiefer, S. M., Alley, K. M., & Ellerbrock, C. R. (2015). Teacher and peer support for young adolescents’ motivation, engagement, and school belonging. Rmle Online, 38(8), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/19404476.2015.11641184
    28. Kinash, S., Brand, J., & Mathew, T. (2012). Challenging mobile learning discourse through research: Student perceptions of Blackboard Mobile Learn and iPads. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(4). https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.832
    29. Klemenčič, M. (2015). What is student agency? An ontological exploration in the context of research on student engagement. Student engagement in Europe: Society, higher education student governance, 20, 11-29.
    30. Kurent, B., & Avsec, S. (2023). Examining pre-service teachers regulation in distance and traditional preschool design and technology education. Heliyon, 9(2). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e13738
    31. Laho, N. S. J. S. C. J. (2019). Enhancing School-Home Communication through Learning Management System Adoption: Parent and Teacher Perceptions and Practices. 29(1), 117-142.
    32. MacDonald, J. (2017). Blended learning and online tutoring: Planning learner support and activity design. Routledge.
    33. Martín‐García, A. V., Martínez‐Abad, F., & Reyes‐González, D. (2019). TAM and stages of adoption of blended learning in higher education by application of data mining techniques. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5), 2484-2500. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12831
    34. Martin, A. J., & Dowson, M. (2009). Interpersonal relationships, motivation, engagement, and achievement: Yields for theory, current issues, and educational practice. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 327-365. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308325583
    35. Matthew, U. O., Kazaure, J. S., & Okafor, N. U. (2021). Contemporary development in E-Learning education, cloud computing technology & internet of things. EAI Endorsed Transactions on Cloud Systems, 7(20), e3-e3. https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.31-3-2021.169173
    36. Nami, F. (2020). Educational smartphone apps for language learning in higher education: Students’ choices and perceptions. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 36(4), 82-95. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.5350
    37. Olelewe, C. J., & Agomuo, E. E. (2016). Effects of B-learning and F2F learning environments on students' achievement in QBASIC programming. Computers and Education, 103, 76-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.09.012
    38. Patrick, S., & Sturgis, C. (2015). Maximizing Competency Education and Blended Learning: Insights from Experts. CompetencyWorks Issue Brief. International Association for K-12 Online Learning.
    39. Priyantini, M. V. D., Sumarjoko, B., Widyasari, C., Rahmawati, L. E., & Prastiwi, Y. (2023). Supporting and inhibiting factors implementation STEAM in blended learning based on augmented reality technology. AIP Conference Proceedings,
    40. Rossing, J. P., Miller, W., Cecil, A. K., & Stamper, S. E. (2012). iLearning: The future of higher education? Student perceptions on learning with mobile tablets. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 12(2), 1-26.
    41. Samuels, M. (2023). A Qualitative Study on the Perception of Caribbean Immigrant College Students on the Influence of the Teacher-Student Relationship on Engagement Concordia University Chicago].
    42. Shaikh, Z. A., & Khoja, S. A. (2012). Role of Teacher in Personal Learning Environments. Digital Education Review, 21, 23-32.
    43. Singh, J., Steele, K., & Singh, L. (2021). Combining the best of online and face-to-face learning: Hybrid and blended learning approach for COVID-19, post vaccine, & post-pandemic world. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 50(2), 140-171. https://doi.org/10.1177/00472395211047865
    44. Singh, K., Chang, M., & Dika, S. (2010). Ethnicity, self-concept, and school belonging: Effects on school engagement. Educational Research for Policy Practice, 9, 159-175. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-010-9087-0
    45. Snart, J. A. (2010). Hybrid learning: The perils and promise of blending online and face-to-face instruction in higher education. Bloomsbury Publishing USA.
    46. So, H.-J., & Brush, T. A. (2008). Student perceptions of collaborative learning, social presence and satisfaction in a blended learning environment: Relationships and critical factors. Computers Education Information Technologies, 51(1), 318-336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.05.009
    47. Sun, A., & Chen, X. J. J. o. i. t. e. R. (2016). Online education and its effective practice: A research review. 15.
    48. Ussher, Y. A., Asante, R. K., Obeng, M. K., & Gyan, S. E. (2023). Assessing tertiary students’ self-engagement characteristics in the online environment. SN Social Sciences, 3(10), 181. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43545-023-00753-0
    49. Vaughan, N. D., Cleveland-Innes, M., & Garrison, D. R. (2013). Teaching in blended learning environments: Creating and sustaining communities of inquiry. Athabasca University Press.
    50. Walling, D. R. (2014). Designing learning for tablet classrooms: Innovations in instruction. Springer.
    51. Wouters, P., Paas, F., & van Merriënboer, J. J. (2008). How to optimize learning from animated models: A review of guidelines based on cognitive load. Review of Educational Research, 78(3), 645-675. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308320320
    52. Yeung, M. W., & Yau, A. H. (2022). A thematic analysis of higher education students’ perceptions of online learning in Hong Kong under COVID-19: Challenges, strategies and support. Education Information Technologies, 27(1), 181-208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10656-3

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Copyright (c) 2024 Malque Publishing

How to cite

Nguyen, D. K., Duong, V. B., Nguyen, C. C., Nguyen, T., & Tran, H.-H. (2024). Factors affecting grade 6 students’ learning following the B-Learning model. Multidisciplinary Reviews, 7(8), 2024180. https://doi.org/10.31893/multirev.2024180
  • Article viewed - 66
  • PDF downloaded - 43