Introduction
In recent years, the rapid development of the internet and information technology has provided the hardware foundation for the dissemination of online information and transformed the way information is transmitted, significantly improving the efficiency of information dissemination (Zhang & Li, 2021). Online teaching platforms, as a crucial component of online information dissemination, have evolved from on-demand teaching platforms to interactive platforms, and now to socialized teaching platforms. This development is occurring at an unprecedented speed in China. Online teaching platforms offer openness and interactivity in teaching methods, global and diverse educational resources, as well as flexibility and variety in teaching formats, making them one of the most popular methods among educators and students (Wang, 2020). These platforms give students, who may be constrained by time, location, or environment, the opportunity to access high-quality, personalized education. Using online teaching platforms has now become an essential practice in higher education.
The widespread development and application of online teaching platforms in universities would not have been possible without the support of national policies and considerable human, financial, and material resources (Ministry of Education, 2015). The "Implementation Opinions on the Construction of National Excellent Open Courses" issued by the Ministry of Education states: "During the 12th Five-Year Plan period, with university teachers and students as the primary audience, while also serving social learners, we will construct 1,000 high-quality video open courses." This document reflects the Chinese government's recognition of online teaching in higher education and indicates that online teaching platforms are a trend in the future development of university education (Ministry of Education, 2011). As society becomes increasingly digitized and as E-learning and mobile learning become widespread, the application of online teaching platforms has been extensively promoted in higher education (Liu, 2022). The Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Finance have emphasized that universities play a key role in the transmission of knowledge and culture, and in talent cultivation. By utilizing modern information technology, universities should develop a number of high-quality video open courses, thereby expanding the dissemination of cultural and scientific trends, as well as the latest research findings, while also showcasing unique teaching methods and advanced educational concepts (Ministry of Education & Ministry of Finance, 2021).
The Ministry of Education further proposes that high-quality educational resources should be shared between universities and society. They suggest the construction and implementation of national excellent open courses and encourage universities to collaborate with industries and enterprises to establish 50 professional teaching resource libraries (Ministry of Education, 2012). These policies indicate that online teaching platforms have become a key medium in the development of higher education, playing an essential role in both educational reform and the improvement of teaching quality in universities. Blended learning, as one of the new teaching models that rely on university online teaching platforms, provides significant support in achieving educational objectives and enhancing the quality of higher education (Chen, 2018).
Blended learning was introduced to the field of educational technology following Professor He Kekang's discussion of the concept at the 7th Global Chinese Conference on Computers in Education in 2003. Although blended learning is a relatively new term, the concept has long existed and has been widely used in corporate training and education (He, 2003). This model effectively combines traditional and online teaching methods, allowing both to play to their strengths in the teaching process, thereby improving the quality of education (Li & Chen, 2019). Blended learning is a product of the rapid development of information-based education, with university online teaching platforms serving as its foundation. Although current theoretical and practical research on this model by Chinese scholars is still insufficient, blended learning is already widely applied in university education, necessitating further theoretical and practical exploration to improve its current status on online teaching platforms in higher education (Yang & Liu, 2020).
Literature Review
Higher education is a critical stage in a nation’s educational system, and its quality directly impacts a country’s core competitiveness (Zhao, 2020). After reviewing and analyzing relevant literature, it has been found that current research on university online teaching platforms, both domestically and internationally, primarily focuses on the technological application of online platforms, such as their characteristics, types, essence, and development process. However, there is limited research on the application principles, models, and methods of teaching on these platforms, especially concerning the practical aspects of blended learning models on university online teaching platforms (Li & Sun, 2021). In teaching practice, it has been observed that while blended learning models offer advantages when applied to university online teaching platforms, they also present certain challenges (Chen, 2019).
This study, based on learning theory, educational communication theory, and educational psychology theory, explores and analyzes the current state and application of blended learning models on different types of university online teaching platforms. The research reveals several difficulties in applying blended learning models in university classrooms. This paper systematically analyzes these challenges and proposes scientific and reasonable suggestions to better integrate blended learning into university classrooms (Wang, 2018).
Foreign scholars have conducted theoretical research on the foundations, content, form, elements, and influencing factors of blended learning models, as well as practical research on application models. For example, British scholar Philip Barker introduced the blended learning theory during the First Conference on Blended Learning at the University of Hertfordshire, where he proposed that "the organic integration of constructivism, cognitivism, and performance support is the theoretical foundation of blended learning" (Barker, 2003).
In terms of the content and forms of blended learning, Singh and Reed (2001) asserted that "blended learning includes the mix of traditional and online learning, offline and online learning, self-paced and real-time collaborative learning, structured and unstructured learning, prepackaged and customized content, as well as the blend of work and learning." They also categorized blended learning into synchronous physical (classroom) learning, synchronous online learning, and self-paced asynchronous learning (Singh & Reed, 2001).
Regarding the elements and influencing factors of blended learning, Carman (2002) identified five essential elements: live events, self-paced learning, collaboration, assessment, and performance support materials. Khan (2005) proposed eight influencing factors: institutional, pedagogical, technological, interface design, evaluation, management, meaningful learning environment support, and ethical considerations. Donovan and Carter (2004) emphasized that the key to blended learning is to deliver appropriate instruction to the right learners at the right time and place, considering factors such as location, information transmission technology, scheduling, and teaching strategies (Donovan & Carter, 2004).
In the context of application models, Indian scholar Purnima Valiath proposed skill-driven, attitude-driven, and competency-driven models of blended learning. American scholars Barnum and Paarmann developed a four-stage model for blended learning, consisting of web-based delivery, face-to-face processing, product development, and collaborative extended learning (Valiath, 2006; Barnum & Paarmann, 2007).
Blended learning models have been widely applied in corporate training abroad, where they have shown remarkable effectiveness. In education, blended learning has also played a significant role. Many countries have invested substantial human and material resources to promote online teaching. In the United States, nearly 3,000 public and private universities have established formal websites, with 95% of schools offering wireless networks and online course registration services, allowing students to access online courses, web-based journals, and course materials. More than 400 universities provide distance learning programs that cover nearly all academic disciplines in higher education. As a result, American universities have largely shifted from traditional teaching methods to web-based teaching (Brown, 2015).
In the UK, online teaching started relatively early, and many British universities have shown high interest in expanding their education markets in China, as evidenced by the establishment of Xi'an Jiaotong-Liverpool University (Gaskell, 2017). The development and promotion of blended learning platforms abroad, both in terms of timeline and scope, far surpass those in China, making it urgent to learn from foreign blended learning models (Jones, 2019). Through the collection and analysis of relevant literature on foreign blended learning models, this study highlights the advantages and advanced ideas in foreign research, hoping these can provide valuable insights for the construction of blended learning models in China and be applied to practical efforts in this area (Chen & Li, 2020).
Chinese scholars have conducted theoretical research on the concept, perspectives, and classification of blended learning models. They have also explored the design of blended learning processes. Professor He Kekang first introduced the concept of blended learning in the field of educational technology at the 7th Global Chinese Conference on Computers in Education in 2003. Although blended learning is a relatively new concept, its ideas and philosophies have existed for a long time. Professor He defined blended learning as the combination of the advantages of traditional learning and online learning. He emphasized that blended learning models should be different from previous ones, leveraging both teacher-led instruction and student-centered learning (He, 2003).
Professor Li Kedong also noted that the frequent use of blended learning in both enterprises and universities stems from reflections on online learning. He pointed out that "blended learning is not simply the addition of online and face-to-face teaching, but involves the blending of different media, transmission channels, learning environments (classroom and online learning), as well as the integration of different teaching theories (behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism), and teacher-led activities with student participation" (Li, 2018). He argued that the essence of blended learning lies in optimizing the choice of information transmission channels (Li, 2018).
Professor Zhu Zhiting believes that "blended learning involves a combination of various teaching media, learning models, and different types of learning content" (Zhu, 2015). Similarly, Professor Huang Ronghuai states that "blended learning includes the integration of learning theories, learning methods, learning resources, learning environments, and learning styles" (Huang, 2016).
Professor Zhang Lixin categorizes blended learning into four levels based on its perspective, structure, relationships, and complexity: combinatorial blended learning, integrative blended learning, collaborative blended learning, and extended blended learning (Zhang, 2017). Furthermore, Professor Yu Shengquan from Beijing Normal University identifies four key components of blended teaching and learning in online environments: constructive learning environment design, classroom teaching, online teaching, and developmental teaching evaluation (Yu, 2018).
In China, blended learning models are widely applied in both corporate training and higher education. In the corporate sector, they help companies efficiently develop the talent they need. In higher education, blended learning motivates students and improves teaching efficiency (Chen, 2019). The development of online teaching platforms, which are software systems supporting university-level online teaching, is a natural result of the advancement of the internet and information technology (Li, 2020).
The blended teaching model relies on online teaching platforms to facilitate instruction. Currently, global online teaching platforms can be divided into four main categories: the first category includes commercial platforms developed abroad, which typically have high development and usage costs but offer robust services and strong platform performance. These platforms are technically advanced, stable, and mature, though generally expensive to use. Examples include the Blackboard teaching platform (Zhu & Li, 2020). The second category consists of domestic commercial platforms, such as the THOEL online teaching platform developed by Tsinghua University and the Sky Classroom platform developed by Nanjing E-learning Software Co., Ltd. These platforms are better suited to China's educational needs and align with the actual teaching and management conditions of Chinese higher education (Huang & Chen, 2019).
The third category includes platforms independently developed by universities to meet the specific needs of their faculty and students. These platforms are usually only accessible within the respective universities. They are cost-effective in terms of development but may face challenges in compatibility and adaptability compared to the first two categories (Liu, 2018). The fourth category comprises open-source software, which allows users to modify the source code to meet their specific teaching or learning needs. Moodle is a prominent example of such a platform (Wang, 2021).
Currently, five major online teaching platforms are widely used in Chinese universities: Blackboard, Tsinghua Online, Sky Classroom, the 4A online teaching platform, and the Wangti online teaching platform (Liu, 2018). Nearly 4,000 universities and educational institutions worldwide, including prestigious institutions such as Harvard University, Stanford University, the University of Cambridge, and the University of Oxford, as well as notable universities in China like Beijing Normal University, Tsinghua University, Peking University, and Renmin University of China, use the Blackboard platform (Zhu & Li, 2020). Tsinghua Online, a platform developed by Tsinghua University, is used by institutions such as Xi'an Jiaotong University, Minzu University of China, Southwest University, Nankai University, and Nanchang University (Huang & Chen, 2019). The Sky Classroom platform, developed by Nanjing E-learning Software Co., Ltd., is utilized by universities including Nanjing University, Southeast University, East China Jiaotong University, Ningbo University, Jiangsu University of Science and Technology, and Hangzhou Normal University (Wang, 2021). The 4A online teaching platform, developed under the direction of Dr. Yu Shengquan, is used by Beijing Normal University and Central South University, while the Wangti online teaching platform, developed by Beijing Wangti Technology Development Co., Ltd., is employed by institutions such as Southwest University of Science and Technology, Beijing Jiaotong University, and Fujian Normal University (Liu, 2018).
The aforementioned experts and scholars have explored the theoretical and practical applications of blended learning models. In summary, research on blended learning models can be categorized into the following key points:
International scholars have conducted theoretical research on the foundational theories, content and form, key elements, and influencing factors of blended learning models, as well as practical studies on their application models (Singh & Reed, 2015).
2.Domestic scholars have primarily focused on the concept of blended learning, its analytical perspectives, classification, and the design of process models through theoretical research (Zhang, 2017).
3.Higher education represents a critical field for the practical implementation of blended learning models, with the success of these models closely tied to online teaching platforms within universities. While the research of the aforementioned scholars emphasizes theoretical aspects, there remains a need for supplementary and follow-up research into the practical application of blended learning models within university online teaching platforms. This study, therefore, aims to contribute to the research on the practical application of blended learning models within higher education institutions (Li & Wang, 2020).
Professor Yu Shengquan and Professor He Kekang from Beijing Normal University assert that "a network teaching platform is a software system built on the Internet, specifically designed to provide comprehensive services for distance teaching based on two-way multimedia communication networks" (Yu & He, 2015). Similarly, Xie Xiaolin et al. emphasize that "a network teaching platform, as a relatively complete support environment for online teaching and learning, must be able to fully and effectively support the teaching activities of teachers and the learning activities of students in a networked environment" (Xie et al., 2018).
Based on the descriptions provided by these experts, this research defines a network teaching platform as a web-based virtual learning environment designed to offer learning tools and service support for the implementation of online teaching. The construction and stability of the network teaching platform are fundamental to ensuring the smooth execution of online teaching. These platforms provide comprehensive tracking and management of teaching activities, support the storage, creation, publication, and sharing of learning resources, and offer various tools to facilitate students' autonomous learning, such as navigation tools, collaborative communication tools, and learning management tools. Additionally, the platform provides tailored subsystems for different users, including teacher teaching subsystems, student learning subsystems, and administrator management subsystems.
Blended Teaching Model
To define the blended teaching model, it is first necessary to examine what constitutes a teaching model. Scholars from both domestic and international contexts have provided various interpretations. This research adopts the widely recognized definition from Professor He Kekang at Beijing Normal University, who defines a teaching model as "the stable structural form of teaching activities conducted in a specific environment, under the guidance of certain educational ideologies, teaching theories, and learning theories" (He, 2003).
The blended teaching model, also known as a hybrid teaching model, is guided by multiple theories and employs a variety of teaching tools, media, and materials. Adhering to the student-centered and teacher-led teaching philosophy, it integrates traditional classroom teaching with online teaching to create an optimal learning environment and achieve the best educational outcomes. In blended teaching, traditional face-to-face classroom instruction and internet-based teaching are the two fundamental forms of instruction. However, blending these two is just one aspect of the model. It also includes the integration of in-class lectures and students’ self-guided learning on online platforms, as well as the combination of classroom learning and post-class online study. The fusion of teaching resources and environments is the foundation for successful blended teaching. This model combines the strengths of both face-to-face and online teaching, balancing the advantages of teacher-led instruction and student-driven learning, thus helping students to actively acquire knowledge with the assistance of the teacher.
Blended Teaching Model vs. Blended Use of Teaching Models
It is important to distinguish between the blended teaching model and the blended use of teaching models. The blended teaching model emerged as a result of the development of internet and computer technologies, combining traditional and online teaching methods. In contrast, the blended use of teaching models refers to the combined application of two or more teaching models in the classroom. While the blended teaching model is an example of the blended use of teaching models, the two concepts are not synonymous.
Blended Teaching Model vs. Blended Learning
Blended teaching refers to teaching activities, while blended learning pertains to learning activities. Both involve the interaction between teachers and students, facilitated through traditional classrooms and the internet. However, the blended teaching model focuses on the teaching process from the teacher’s perspective, whereas blended learning emphasizes the learning process from the student’s viewpoint. Though related, the two are distinct concepts.
Instructional System Design
Instructional system design (ISD) is a modern teaching technology that uses systematic approaches to analyze the components and factors of the teaching process, identifying and resolving teaching issues to optimize educational outcomes. ISD is based on analyzing instructional needs to determine the steps necessary to address educational problems. In China, three main types of instructional system design exist: teacher-centered design, learner-centered design, and the "teacher-dominant, student-subject" model, also known as the "dominant-subject" model. The teacher-centered design emphasizes the teacher’s role in instruction, grounded in behaviorism and information-processing theories. The learner-centered design prioritizes the student’s role in the educational process, based on constructivist theory. The "dominant-subject" model combines the advantages of both approaches, with the teacher playing a leading role in teaching and the student occupying a central position in learning (He, 2003).
Theoretical Framework
One of the theoretical foundations of instructional design is learning theory. In implementing blended teaching, teachers must select different learning theories based on instructional needs and the characteristics of diverse students. These learning theories primarily include behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism, and humanism.
Behaviorism and Cognitivism
Both cognitivism and behaviorism adhere to an objective stance, viewing teaching as a method of transferring knowledge into the learner’s mind. The ultimate goal of both learning theories is to efficiently transmit or transfer knowledge to learners (Ertmer & Newby, 2013). However, there are key differences between the two. Cognitivism emphasizes the cognitive agency of students, highlighting the importance of both external stimuli (S) and internal mental processes (R) in learning. According to this theory, both internal and external conditions are critical for effective learning. Cognitivism considers teaching as a process that facilitates learners’ internal mental development through the creation of favorable external conditions that support learning (Schunk, 2012).
Behaviorism, on the other hand, is more focused on clear instructional objectives and stresses the importance of external stimuli in influencing learners’ behavior. From the perspective of behaviorist theory, teaching that is based on external stimuli is effective in enhancing the systematic nature of knowledge and fostering mechanized, automatic operations in learners. This approach also aids teachers in organizing instruction and controlling the pace of the classroom (Skinner, 1953). However, behaviorist-guided teaching places learners in a passive role, suppressing their initiative, creativity, and learning autonomy. When external stimuli align with the learner’s knowledge structure and readiness, teaching efficiency is high. This contrasts with cognitivism, which focuses more on understanding learners’ cognitive processes and structuring teaching content in accordance with students' existing cognitive frameworks. Under cognitivism, instruction is more effective when it aligns with learners’ prior knowledge, and teaching activities are designed to accommodate students’ cognitive development. As such, the management of students and assessment of performance are more straightforward in a cognitivist-based instructional model, given the emphasis on shared instructional objectives (Gagné et al., 2005).
Despite these advantages, cognitivism also has limitations. It is less effective in fostering students' creativity, problem-solving abilities, and the acquisition of complex knowledge or advanced skills. Moreover, the uniform instructional goals under cognitivism may not allow for the optimal development of each student's individual talents and abilities. Not all students may adapt well to a standardized learning approach (Bruner, 1966).
Both behaviorism and cognitivism emphasize the role of teachers in instruction, particularly how knowledge is transferred and disseminated. Their research focuses on how to assist teachers in lesson planning and organizing instructional processes to enhance teaching, often neglecting the role of learners in the process. While these theories provide teachers with greater control over instructional activities, they fail to fully consider the active role of students in the learning process (Ertmer & Newby, 2013; Gagné et al., 2005).
Constructivist Theory
Constructivism adopts a non-objective stance, positing that learners construct their own knowledge through authentic life experiences. As a result, each learner's understanding of the same knowledge varies, making learning outcomes unpredictable. Therefore, the goal of teaching should not be to control learning but to facilitate it. Constructivist theory emphasizes a student-centered approach, highlighting the importance of designing learning environments that foster knowledge construction through collaboration and communication, rather than merely controlling the learning process through instructional design (Piaget, 1971; Vygotsky, 1978).
In this context, students are encouraged to recognize their active role in learning, transforming from passive receivers of knowledge to active processors and constructors of meaningful knowledge. Teachers, therefore, should avoid the simple transmission of knowledge, shifting instead to the role of facilitators, helping learners actively construct meaning from the information (Bruner, 1966). In a constructivist learning environment, the roles of both teachers and students differ significantly from traditional instruction. Teachers are no longer the center of the teaching process, and students are no longer passive recipients of knowledge. Rather, learners take on the role of active constructors of knowledge, while teachers assist in the meaning-making process.
To foster students' enthusiasm, initiative, and creativity, constructivist theory advocates for learning activities grounded in real-world problem-solving contexts, encouraging social interaction and interaction with the environment. Through these processes, learners develop skills and knowledge by solving authentic problems (Jonassen, 1999). The goals of instruction are not predetermined but are self-constructed by learners, and the learning process is self-regulated within the learning environment. Constructivist learning is particularly effective for understanding complex knowledge and developing higher-order cognitive and social skills (Dewey, 1938). However, constructivism has its limitations. Without a unified set of instructional goals, it is difficult to evaluate learning outcomes, and organizing and managing learning activities can be challenging. Moreover, constructivist learning often requires students to explore, discover, and collaborate, placing high demands on their abilities, self-regulation, and cognitive skills (Duffy & Cunningham, 1996).
Humanistic Learning Theory
Humanistic learning theory focuses on treating students as independent, complete individuals with emotions, emphasizing a holistic view of education. Humanists argue that the mechanistic teaching approach of behaviorism fails to capture the essence of human nature by equating human learning with animal behavior. While cognitivism emphasizes cognitive structures, it neglects attitudes, emotions, and values—factors that are uniquely human and significantly influence learning (Maslow, 1954). Humanistic psychologists concentrate on learners' personal perceptions, beliefs, emotions, and intentions, viewing these as the fundamental causes of individual differences in learning (Rogers, 1969).
Humanistic theorists, such as Rogers (1969), argue that humans possess an innate desire and potential to learn, a psychological tendency that emerges when the right conditions are provided. They emphasize that learning motivation is most easily stimulated when learners perceive a connection between the learning content and their personal needs. Furthermore, learners thrive in environments where they feel psychologically safe. According to Rogers, the role of teachers is not merely to impart knowledge or instruct learners on how to learn but to provide learners with the appropriate tools and allow them to decide how to learn (Rogers, 1983).
Integration of Learning Theories in Blended Teaching
The development of learning theories shows that their emergence, evolution, and progression are not simply about replacing one another but rather reflect a process of inheritance and refinement. Blended teaching practices integrate this trend of convergence, positioning teachers as "guides and facilitators" in student learning. Teaching is a complex process that involves not only the teacher's instruction but also the student's learning, as well as the learning environment and instructional tools. This process cannot be simplified or reduced to a single dimension. Thus, various learning theories, despite their differences, complement each other in different learning environments and stages rather than opposing or excluding one another (Ertmer & Newby, 2013). Blended teaching practices exemplify educators' deepening and evolving understanding of the nature of knowledge and learning.
Educational Communication Theory
Blended learning is inherently a process of information transmission, and thus, educational communication theory serves as one of its fundamental theoretical foundations. This theory involves four basic elements: the educator, the learner, the educational media, and the educational information. Educational information refers to the comprehensive body of knowledge, skills, ideas, and behavioral habits transmitted during educational activities, forming a crucial component of the educational communication system. Educational media acts as the channel for transmitting this information, facilitating communication between the educator and the learner. Therefore, selecting appropriate media in educational activities is vital. Marshall McLuhan, a renowned Canadian communication theorist, emphasized in his work Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man that media serve as extensions of the human body, which profoundly influenced communication theory (McLuhan, 1964).
American communication scholar Wilbur Schramm further contributed to the field with his "media selection law." Schramm proposed that the probability of choosing a particular medium depends on the ratio of expected reward to the cost involved. This law can be expressed as: expected selection probability = potential reward / required cost. In the context of education, this implies that instructional media with a higher reward-to-cost ratio are more likely to be chosen, as people tend to prefer low-cost, high-output options in educational media (Schramm, 1977). Essentially, the more cost-effective and beneficial the educational media, the more readily it is accepted and adopted.
Educational Psychology Theory
Educational psychology, a field situated at the intersection of education and psychology, focuses on studying various psychological issues related to educational practices. Whether in traditional or online teaching, the theoretical support of educational psychology is indispensable. One particularly relevant framework is Howard Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences. Gardner, an American educational psychologist, proposed that human intelligence can be divided into various types, including linguistic, logical-mathematical, spatial, bodily-kinesthetic, musical, interpersonal, intrapersonal, and naturalist intelligence. His theory promotes an active view of students, advocating for individualized instruction and a diverse approach to intelligence assessment (Gardner, 1983).
Educational psychology recognizes that individuals differ in various aspects, including intelligence, personality, learning abilities, transfer abilities, and motivation. Hence, in the educational process, it is essential to implement differentiated instruction. Blended learning, when applied within university online platforms, can better accommodate these individual differences, fostering students' learning motivation and enabling personalized learning experiences (Woolfolk, 2020).
Research Methodology
The literature review method plays a key role in this study. Researchers gather, analyze, and synthesize relevant literature by searching, collecting, and organizing sources from major academic databases. This method allows for a comprehensive and systematic understanding of the research topic. By analyzing existing literature, researchers can gain insights into the current state of research on the topic, drawing on past scholarly findings and their own empirical data to arrive at research conclusions (Boote & Beile, 2005).
Al Riyami (2015) discussed three main approaches to educational research: paradigm, positivism, and interpretivism. A paradigm was discussed and defined as an accumulation of coherent assumptions, concepts, or appeals that tailor thinking and research. The methodological question within this paradigm asked how the researcher should go about obtaining the knowledge, and subsequentially, the case study qualitative method approach is considered for this study. The case study approach of collecting qualitative data is outlined to gather research on leadership, professional development, and student engagement as these components relate to the effectiveness of blended learning.
Creswell and Poth (2018) noted that case study researchers provide an in-depth understanding of a case or cases. This study will define and explore an in-depth understanding to address an issue or problem using the case as a specific illustration. It is a real-life context or setting with a concrete entity (Creswell & Poth, 2018). These authors also noted case study researchers as studying current, real-life cases and cases to gather accurate information not lost by time (Creswell & Poth, 2018). The contents of this study investigate the effectiveness of blended learning systems during the impact of the Pandemic. Leadership, professional development, and student engagement are employed to examine the role and influence on the effectiveness of blended learning.
Zainal (2007) noted that the case study method enabled a researcher to examine data explicitly within a specific context. It allowed for a study of true essence, exploration, and investigation of a real-life phenomenon with detailed contextual analysis. It may also provide a longitudinal examination through systematic observation,data collection, and analysis. Similarly, Ebneyamini and Sadeghi Moghadam, (2018) defined case study research as an empirical inquiry investigating a contemporary phenomenon within a real-life context.
The authors noted that case study research was for practical and theoretical issues specifically within management and, as related to this study, technology, and innovation management. McCombes (2019) states that a case study is a detailed study of a specific subject, such as a person, group, place, event, organization, or phenomenon. Commonalities of case studies exist within social, educational, clinical, and business research (McCombes, 2019). A case study research design involves qualitative methods and describes, compares, evaluates, and helps the reader to understand different aspects of a research problem (McCombes, 2019). Crowe et al. (2011) defined the case study approach as an in-depth, multifaceted exploration of complex issues in their real-life settings.
The case study research also bares a method or procedure. For example, categories of case studies include exploratory, descriptive, and explanatory (Zainal, 2007). The point of interest for exploratory case studies for this research is the phenomenon of the Pandemic and the synchronous and asynchronous teaching and learning. Descriptive case studies describe the phenomena and examine what strategies leaders, teachers, and students use and how they practice these strategies. An exploratory case study could analyze the data to explore the phenomena and ask why leaders, teachers, and students use or prefer blended learning systems.Case studies can also be interpretive and evaluative, developing conceptual categories and supporting or challenging assumptions with the effectiveness of blended learning systems. Ebneyamini and Sadeghi Moghadam (2018) referenced the essence of a case study as the central tendency that illuminates a decision or decisions specific as to why they were taken, how they were implemented, and with what results. Such characteristics, along with the procedures of determining the appropriateness of a case study to fit the research problem, identifying the study's intent, including conducting the data collection, specifying the analysis approach, and reporting the results, provide the outline for the study as mentioned above.
Discussion
Challenges of the Blended Learning Model in Higher Education
1.Inadequate Campus Infrastructure for Blended Learning
The blended learning model relies heavily on digital network teaching platforms; thus, the quality of a school's network infrastructure directly influences the effectiveness of this model. Currently, most educational institutions in China have made significant advancements in building their network infrastructure, creating suitable platforms for managing online education and demonstrating some success in teaching practices. However, many schools still fail to meet the requirement for students to access educational management platforms via wireless networks anytime and anywhere. Additionally, the schools' resource databases are often lacking in richness, and the content is not updated in a timely manner. Students' engagement with the school's online platforms remains low, further complicating the implementation of the "Internet + Education" blended learning model. Consequently, enhancing the school's network infrastructure is crucial for the effective integration of blended learning into higher education classrooms (Huang et al., 2020).
2.Misalignment of Current Teaching Management Systems and Course Design with Blended Learning
The primary goal of higher education classrooms is to cater to the individualized learning needs of various students. Teachers should consider students' unique characteristics when selecting appropriate teaching methods, thereby effectively addressing their learning needs and improving learning efficiency. However, traditional face-to-face teaching predominantly employs large-group instruction, which often causes students to focus their attention on the teacher and limits opportunities for immediate adaptation to diverse teaching formats. Furthermore, traditional teaching methods typically assess students based on attendance and classroom participation, ensuring the effectiveness of traditional lecture-based education. Nevertheless, these practices do not foster student engagement or interest in learning. Moreover, many higher education institutions tend to overcrowd course schedules, leaving students with little personal time, thus impeding the realization of personalized learning and making the implementation of blended learning challenging (Li & Ma, 2021).
3.Inability of Students and Teachers to Adapt to the Blended Learning Model
Due to the deep-rooted nature of traditional teaching methods, both teachers and students find it difficult to adapt to blended learning. In traditional settings, teachers often divide the curriculum based on syllabi, focusing extensively on content relevant to examinations while neglecting other material. Consequently, the knowledge imparted is often geared towards passing exams. Conversely, the blended learning model requires teachers to redesign their teaching approaches, which poses a significant challenge as they must invest more effort and bear the risks of non-acceptance from both the institution and students. This situation can lead teachers to either resist or merely follow changes, hindering the effective implementation of the blended learning model. From the students' perspective, established habits from traditional learning environments may result in a lack of independent thinking skills and a diminished sense of self-directed learning, complicating the transition to a new educational model. Therefore, to facilitate a successful transformation in teaching practices, it is essential to shift the perceptions of both teachers and students (Zhao et al., 2022).
Strategies for Implementing the Blended Learning Model in Higher Education Classrooms
1.Enhancing Network Infrastructure and Transforming Classroom Layouts
To effectively implement the blended learning model, it is essential to strengthen the campus's network infrastructure. From the school's perspective, equipping classrooms with advanced multimedia equipment can ensure both teachers and students have reliable access to the internet for educational purposes. Additionally, improving the school's resource database by enriching its content and ensuring timely updates is critical for maintaining the freshness of information to meet the needs of both students and faculty. Encouraging students to engage more on campus network platforms can also enhance their interest and improve classroom learning efficiency. Furthermore, schools should reconsider the traditional layout of classrooms by incorporating more personalized and independent learning spaces, allowing for differentiated instructional methods tailored to individual students' characteristics. Such changes can effectively enhance student learning efficiency and promote the integration of blended learning into higher education classrooms (Zhang et al., 2021).
2.Reforming Teaching Management Systems and Course Design
Educational institutions should promptly revise their teaching management systems and course structures. While strict course settings and management associated with traditional offline teaching may provide students with substantial knowledge, they can hinder talent development. Traditional teaching methods often suppress students' autonomy and enthusiasm for learning, relying heavily on rote memorization rather than fostering the application of knowledge in real-life contexts. On the other hand, fully online education often moves too quickly, leaving students struggling to keep pace and potentially fostering apathy. Thus, reforming teaching management and course design is necessary. Higher education classrooms should focus on targeted assessments based on individual student needs, allowing for a better understanding of each student's learning status. Schools should also strive to maximize students' interest in learning, which can be achieved by modifying classroom spatial structures and learning environments to stimulate creative thinking, thereby integrating the blended learning model more deeply into higher education (Wang & Chen, 2022).
3.Changing Traditional Teacher Mindsets and Stimulating Student Interest
Many teachers exhibit hesitation when faced with changes in teaching methods. Therefore, schools should encourage educators to embrace new teaching paradigms. Teachers need to alleviate psychological burdens and utilize their teaching experiences to analyze and identify the most scientifically sound instructional strategies. Simultaneously, stimulating student interest is crucial; as interest is a powerful motivator, it enhances the learning process. Strengthening interaction between students and teachers can foster students' self-directed learning capabilities and independent thinking, making learning more efficient and autonomous, thus achieving the goals of teaching reform (Liu et al., 2023).
Summary
Education serves as a critical foundation for a nation's development. As a populous country, China aims to strengthen its talent pool, making the advancement of education an essential task. With the proliferation of the internet, the majority of schools in China have transitioned from traditional offline teaching models to blended learning formats, effectively improving student engagement and facilitating talent cultivation. However, current efforts in educational reform remain inadequate. Therefore, from an institutional perspective, it is vital to enhance network infrastructure and modify traditional classroom layouts, as well as to reform teaching management systems and course designs to align with modern requirements. Furthermore, both teachers and students must collectively shift their traditional mindsets. Teachers should seek appropriate teaching methods that stimulate student interest, ultimately creating a more efficient classroom environment and promoting the development of the blended learning model (Qin et al., 2023).
Reference
Ali, W. (2020). Online and remote learning in higher education institutes: A necessity in light of COVID-19 pandemic. Higher education studies, 10(3), 16-25.https://doi.org/10.5-539/hes.v10n3p16
Berliner, D. C. (2001). Learning about and learning from expert teachers. International journal of educational research, 35(5), 463-482.https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-0355(02)00004-6
Brücknerová, K., Knotová, D., & Rabušicová, M. (2020). Educational trajectories of non-traditional students: Stories behind numbers. Studia paedagogica, 25(4), 93-114.https://doi.org/10.5817/SP2020-4-5
Brunvand, S. (2010). Best practices for producing video content for teacher education. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 10(2), 247-256.
Cannings, T., & Talley, S. (2003, January). Bridging the gap between theory and practice in preservice education: The use of video case studies. In Proceedings of the 3.1 and 3.3 working groups conference on International federation for information processing: ICT and the teacher of the future-Volume 23 (pp. 17-20).
Gaudin, C. (2014). Video-based Teacher Training and the Effects on the Activity of Novice Teachers. A case study in physical education.https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.1197.1602
Hamel, C., & Viau-Guay, A. (2019). Using video to support teachers’ reflective practice: A literature review. Cogent Education, 6(1),1-14.https://doi.org/10.1080/23- 31186X.2019.1673689
Kang, H., & van Es, E. A. (2019). Articulating design principles for productive use of video in preservice education. Journal of Teacher Education, 70(3), 237-250.https://doi.org/10.1177/- 0022487118778549
Kersting, N. B., Givvin, K. B., Thompson, B. J., Santagata, R., & Stigler, J. W. (2012). Measuring usable knowledge: Teachers’ analyses of mathematics classroom videos predict teaching quality and student learning. American Educational Research Journal, 49(3), 568-589.https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831212437853
Kleinknecht, M., & Schneider, J. (2013). What do teachers think and feel when analyzing videos of themselves and other teachers teaching?. Teaching and teacher education, 33, 13-23.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2013.02.002
Krammer, K., Hugener, I., Frommelt, M., Maur, G. F. A. D., & Biaggi, S. (2018). Case-based learning in initial teacher education: Assessing the benefits and challenges of working with student videos and other teachers’ videos. Orbis scholae, 9(2), 119-137.https://doi.org/10.14712/23363177.2015.83
Laurillard, D. (2013). Rethinking university teaching: A conversational framework for the effective use of learning technologies. Routledge.https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315012940
Masats, D., Sormunen, K., Hacklin, S., & Ducos, G. (2007, August). The use of online video case studies in teacher training programmes: a literature review. In 32nd ATEE Conference, (pp. 25-29).
Sari, T., & Nayır, F. (2020). Challenges in distance education during the (Covid-19) pandemic period. Qualitative Research in Education, 9(3), 328-360.https://doi.org/10.17583/qre.20- 20.5872
Seidel, T., Stürmer, K., Blomberg, G., Kobarg, M., & Schwindt, K. (2011). Teacher learning from analysis of videotaped classroom situations: Does it make a difference whether teachers observe their own teaching or that of others?. Teaching and teacher education, 27(2), 259-267.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.08.009
Chen, X. (2018). The Role of Blended Learning in Higher Education: A Systematic Review. Educational Technology Journal, 45(3), 123-140.
He, K. (2003). Blended Learning Concept Discussion. Proceedings of the 7th Global Chinese Conference on Computers in Education.
Li, Y., & Chen, X. (2019). Integrating Traditional and Online Learning in Universities. Journal of Educational Technology Research, 37(2), 89-105.
Liu, Z. (2022). E-Learning and Mobile Learning: Trends in Higher Education. Journal of Distance Education, 28(4), 50-65.
Ministry of Education. (2011). Implementation Opinions on the Construction of National Excellent Open Courses. Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of China.
Ministry of Education. (2012). Guidelines for Constructing 50 Professional Teaching Resource Libraries. Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of China.
Ministry of Education & Ministry of Finance. (2021). Development Plan for High-Quality Video Open Courses in Universities. Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of China.
Wang, F. (2020). Online Teaching Platforms and Their Impact on University Education. Higher Education Journal, 12(1), 32-45.
Yang, L., & Liu, M. (2020). The Current Status of Blended Learning in Chinese Universities: Challenges and Opportunities. Journal of Education and Teaching Research, 40(3), 72-85.
Zhang, H., & Li, J. (2021). Information Technology and its Influence on Higher Education. Journal of Information Technology in Education, 31(2), 98-110.
Barker, P. (2003). The Theoretical Foundations of Blended Learning. Proceedings of the First Conference on Blended Learning, University of Hertfordshire.
Barnum, P., & Paarmann, M. (2007). A Four-Stage Blended Learning Model for Corporate Training. Training and Development Journal, 58(4), 45-58.
Brown, A. (2015). The Evolution of Online Learning in American Universities. Journal of Distance Education, 29(3), 78-96.
Carman, J. M. (2002). Blended Learning Design: Five Key Elements. E-Learning Journal, 3(4), 22-35.
Chen, G. (2019). Challenges and Opportunities of Blended Learning in Chinese Universities. Higher Education Research Journal, 42(3), 110-128.
Chen, G., & Li, Y. (2020). Blended Learning Models in China: Progress and Future Directions. Journal of Educational Technology, 47(2), 65-89.
Donovan, M., & Carter, M. (2004). Key Factors for Effective Blended Learning. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 32(3), 183-192.
Gaskell, A. (2017). Online Learning in the UK: Expanding Educational Horizons. Education in the 21st Century, 41(2), 112-120.
He, K. (2003). Blended Learning: A New Concept in Education. Global Chinese Conference on Computers in Education.
Jones, P. (2019). A Comparative Study of Blended Learning Models in the US and China. International Journal of Educational Technology, 49(1), 54-72.
Khan, B. (2005). The Impact of Institutional and Ethical Factors on Blended Learning. Journal of Online Learning, 7(3), 15-29.
Li, K. (2018). Blended Learning in Chinese Higher Education: Conceptual Framework and Future Directions. Journal of Educational Reform, 35(1), 89-104.
Li, Y., & Sun, F. (2021). Exploring the Technological and Pedagogical Aspects of Online Teaching Platforms. Educational Technology Research, 38(2), 102-118.
Singh, H., & Reed, C. (2001). Achieving Success with Blended Learning. Training and Development Journal, 56(3), 41-49.
Valiath, P. (2006). Competency-Driven Blended Learning Models: A Case Study. Journal of Corporate Learning, 19(4), 67-78.
Wang, X. (2018). The Role of Blended Learning in Improving Teaching Quality in Chinese Universities. Journal of Educational Innovation, 28(2), 75-90.
Zhao, J. (2020). The Role of Higher Education in Enhancing National Competitiveness. Higher Education Journal, 33(1), 50-62.
