Approaches to the Blended Learning Organisation
Iryna S. Mintii
1,2,3,4,5 a
1
Institute for Digitalisation of Education of the NAES of Ukraine, 9 M. Berlynskoho Str., Kyiv, 04060, Ukraine
2
Kryvyi Rih State Pedagogical University, 54 Gagarin Ave., Kryvyi Rih, 50086, Ukraine
3
Lviv Polytechnic National University, 12 Stepana Bandery Str., Lviv, 79000, Ukraine
4
Zhytomyr Polytechnic State University, 103 Chudnivsyka Str., Zhytomyr, 10005, Ukraine
5
Academy of Cognitive and Natural Sciences, 54 Gagarin Ave., Kryvyi Rih, 50086, Ukraine
Keywords:
Blended Learning, Blended Learning Organization, Teacher Education, Teacher Training, Teacher Retraining.
Abstract:
The relevance of research on blended learning (BL) has increased significantly during and after the COVID-
19 quarantine. Particular attention should be paid to teachers’ training and retraining to conduct BL classes.
The study aims to analyze scientific sources from the Scopus database systematically on the BL utilization in
teacher training and retraining during the onset and progression of the COVID-19 pandemic. The final sample
consisted of 27 sources. By analyzing studies, the following leading approaches to BL organization were iden-
tified: by the combination method (in particular, a pre-planned combining of face-to-face, synchronous and
asynchronous distance learning through BL design and emergency transition from full-time to distance learn-
ing; combining of full-time and part-time forms of learning, learning on weekdays and weekends; on-campus
and distance learning, etc.), by ICT tools (in particular, application LMS; institutional training in open courses
posted on MOOC platforms; application of software and hardware for BL implementation); by pedagogical
technologies BL (effective communication, interaction, and collaboration in the BL environment; teacher-led
group and individual reflection on students’ experience of using BL tools in their own lessons; students’ work
in small groups; project approach; mobile learning, in particular, on-demand learning; gamification in learn-
ing). The identified approaches to BL organization provide a number of advantages, including personalization;
improved access to resources; intellectualization of learning. However, BL is not without its weaknesses, in-
cluding dependence on technology; technical difficulties, and the need to train both teachers and students.
1 INTRODUCTION
The first studies on the introduction of blended learn-
ing (BL) in education date back to the beginning of
the twenty-first century and the full-scale introduction
of BL in education was organised in 2020 due to the
need for social distancing caused by the COVID-19
pandemic (Kovalchuk et al., 2023). Even before the
pandemic, researchers voiced numerous arguments in
favour of using BL, including, for example, meeting
the needs of learning in small remote and isolated ar-
eas where there are not enough students (of the same
speciality) to form a group or there is no teacher or
training centre, it is not possible to implement tra-
ditional – face-to-face – study programmes, to cover
hard-to-reach areas (e.g., small islands, mountainous
areas), as well as in case of lack of educational facili-
a
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3586-4311
ties (Zagouras et al., 2022, p. 12944). It is also noted
in (Asghar et al., 2022, p. 1) that “BL approaches are
considered as the most viable for the delivery of train-
ing to remote areas and accessing learners at a mass
level”, and that “students who cannot maintain regular
traditional schools . . . with severe health issues . . . and
students in long-term incarceration” (Asghar et al.,
2022, p. 2). An important addition to the above is
that BL promotes “continuity of the education during
the COVID-19 crisis and even in war situations like
Ukraine, Yemen” (Iyer et al., 2023, p. 43).
Scholars have consistently emphasised the rele-
vance of research on the practical implementation of
BL, as “a review of empirical research on BL can help
stimulate thinking about effective strategies for de-
signing and implementing BL teacher education pro-
grammes” (Keengwe and Kang, 2013, p. 480), but
despite the numerous studies, “there are still lim-
ited studies concerning the implementation of BL”
114
Mintii, I.
Approaches to the Blended Learning Organisation.
DOI: 10.5220/0012647500003737
Paper published under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)
In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on History, Theory and Methodology of Learning (ICHTML 2023), pages 114-121
ISBN: 978-989-758-579-1; ISSN: 2976-0836
Proceedings Copyright © 2024 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda.

(Zagouras et al., 2022, p. 12942). One of the impor-
tant factors influencing the effective implementation
of BL approaches is the competence of teachers, so
the issue of their BL and readiness to implement it
needs to be studied first.
The purpose of the study is to systematically
analyse scientific sources on the use of BL in teacher
training and retraining at the beginning and during the
development of the COVID-19 pandemic.
2 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The scientometric database Scopus was used to
obtain a sample of publications. Since the goal
is to analyse scientific sources on the use of
BL for teacher training, a preliminary selection
was made on 11.01.2023 using the search query:
(TITLE-ABS-KEY ("blended learning") AND
TITLE-ABS-KEY ("teacher education" OR
"teacher training")). The query resulted in 397
sources. The chronological boundaries of the study,
defined according to the objective as 01.01.2020 –
11.01.2023, allowed us to reduce the number of
selected sources to 130. The need to get acquainted
with the content of the sources led to a reduction
in the sample by removing sources that were not
publicly available. The final sample consisted of 27
sources: (Ridwan et al., 2020; Joseph and Trinick,
2021; Abaci et al., 2021; Zagouras et al., 2022;
Asghar et al., 2022; Jiang et al., 2022; Jen and
Hoogeveen, 2022; Meulenbroeks, 2020; Lorenza
and Carter, 2021; Calder
´
on et al., 2021; Theelen
et al., 2020; Garcia-Ponce and Mora-Pablo, 2020;
Harangus et al., 2021; Almendingen et al., 2021;
Sumarni et al., 2021; Mihret et al., 2022; S¸ent
¨
urk,
2021; Kemaloglu Er and Bayyurt, 2022; Sutiah et al.,
2020; Alsina Tarr
´
es et al., 2022; Herliana et al., 2021;
Jenkins and Crawford, 2021; Glietenberg et al., 2022;
Le and Pham, 2021; Yan and Chen, 2021; Bozkurt,
2022; Short et al., 2021).
The analysis of the sample made it possible to
identify the main areas of research (figure 1): a reflec-
tive review of own experience of implementing BL
(Ridwan et al., 2020; Joseph and Trinick, 2021; Abaci
et al., 2021), quantitative and qualitative analyses of
certain aspects of BL implementation (Zagouras et al.,
2022; Asghar et al., 2022; Jiang et al., 2022; Jen
and Hoogeveen, 2022; Meulenbroeks, 2020; Lorenza
and Carter, 2021; Calder
´
on et al., 2021; Theelen
et al., 2020; Garcia-Ponce and Mora-Pablo, 2020;
Harangus et al., 2021; Almendingen et al., 2021;
Sumarni et al., 2021; Mihret et al., 2022; S¸ent
¨
urk,
2021; Kemaloglu Er and Bayyurt, 2022; Sutiah et al.,
2020; Alsina Tarr
´
es et al., 2022; Herliana et al., 2021;
Jenkins and Crawford, 2021; Glietenberg et al., 2022;
Le and Pham, 2021), and systematic reviews on the
subject (Yan and Chen, 2021; Bozkurt, 2022; Short
et al., 2021).
On the other hand, we can identify studies that
have been conducted with both future teachers (Jiang
et al., 2022; Meulenbroeks, 2020; Lorenza and Carter,
2021; Vielma Puente and Ruano, 2021; Theelen et al.,
2020; Garcia-Ponce and Mora-Pablo, 2020; Harangus
et al., 2021; Almendingen et al., 2021; Sumarni et al.,
2021; Mihret et al., 2022; S¸ent
¨
urk, 2021; Ridwan
et al., 2020; Kemaloglu Er and Bayyurt, 2022; Su-
tiah et al., 2020; Alsina Tarr
´
es et al., 2022; Herliana
et al., 2021; Jenkins and Crawford, 2021; Joseph and
Trinick, 2021; Le and Pham, 2021) and practitioners
(Zagouras et al., 2022; Asghar et al., 2022; Brugge-
man et al., 2022; Jen and Hoogeveen, 2022; Calder
´
on
et al., 2021; Salonen et al., 2021; Abaci et al., 2021;
Glietenberg et al., 2022).
The research geography covers Europe (Greece
(Zagouras et al., 2022), Romania (Harangus et al.,
2021), Netherlands (Meulenbroeks, 2020; Theelen
et al., 2020), Croatia, Malta, Germany, Portugal, and
Norway (Jen and Hoogeveen, 2022; Almendingen
et al., 2021), France (Lami et al., 2021), Spain, the
United Kingdom (Alsina Tarr
´
es et al., 2022; Abaci
et al., 2021), Belgium (Bruggeman et al., 2022), Fin-
land (Salonen et al., 2021), and Turkey (S¸ent
¨
urk,
2021; Kemaloglu Er and Bayyurt, 2022)), Asia (Hong
Kong (Jen and Hoogeveen, 2022), Pakistan (Asghar
et al., 2022), China (Jiang et al., 2022), Indonesia
(Sumarni et al., 2021; Ridwan et al., 2020; Sutiah
et al., 2020; Herliana et al., 2021), Vietnam (Le and
Pham, 2021)), Australia (Lorenza and Carter, 2021;
Jenkins and Crawford, 2021; Joseph and Trinick,
2021), South America (Ecuador (Vielma Puente and
Ruano, 2021), Mexico (Garcia-Ponce and Mora-
Pablo, 2020)), Africa (Ethiopia (Mihret et al., 2022),
South Africa (Glietenberg et al., 2022)) (figure 2).
Research topics include (figure 3):
• BL in teacher training:
– BL organization for future teachers
(Vielma Puente and Ruano, 2021; Le and
Pham, 2021; Bruggeman et al., 2022), in
particular during the COVID-19 pandemic
(Sutiah et al., 2020; Herliana et al., 2021;
Joseph and Trinick, 2021);
– the impact of BL on the academic achieve-
ments of future teachers, in particular aspects
of self-regulation of learning activities (Jiang
et al., 2022), online activity (Salonen et al.,
2021), and the development of 21st-century
skills (S¸ ent
¨
urk, 2021);
Approaches to the Blended Learning Organisation
115

3
21
3
a review of own experience
quantitative and qualitative analyses
systematic reviews
Figure 1: Distribution of sources by research area.
Figure 2: Research geography.
– academic mobility of future teachers in the BL
context (Theelen et al., 2020; Alsina Tarr
´
es
et al., 2022);
– BL in the formation of future teachers’ pro-
fessional competencies, including general (Al-
mendingen et al., 2021) and methodological
ones (Short et al., 2021; Harangus et al., 2021;
Sumarni et al., 2021);
– BL in the training of subjects teachers: physical
education and primary school (Calder
´
on et al.,
2021), English (Garcia-Ponce and Mora-Pablo,
2020; Ridwan et al., 2020; Kemaloglu Er and
Bayyurt, 2022), physics (Mihret et al., 2022),
music (Jenkins and Crawford, 2021);
• BL in teacher retraining: for teaching gifted chil-
dren (Jen and Hoogeveen, 2022) and using digital
technologies in formal (Zagouras et al., 2022) and
non-formal education (Abaci et al., 2021);
• BL in teacher training and retraining: determin-
ing the balance of BL parts (Asghar et al., 2022),
analyzing the organization of emergency BL in
the context of COVID-19 (Meulenbroeks, 2020;
Lorenza and Carter, 2021; Glietenberg et al.,
2022).
3 RESULTS
While the studies of previous years focused more
on the conceptual and theoretical foundations of BL,
in particular, the definition of BL, discussion of its
components, identification of BL organization mod-
els (Staker and Horn, 2012), etc., the beginning and
the process of the COVID-19 pandemic are charac-
terized by studies that consider the practical expe-
rience of BL implementation. The analysis of key
papers (Zagouras et al., 2022; Asghar et al., 2022;
Jen and Hoogeveen, 2022; Meulenbroeks, 2020;
Vielma Puente and Ruano, 2021; Garcia-Ponce and
Mora-Pablo, 2020; Sumarni et al., 2021; Mihret et al.,
2022; S¸ent
¨
urk, 2021; Lami et al., 2021; Ridwan et al.,
2020; Kemaloglu Er and Bayyurt, 2022; Alsina Tarr
´
es
ICHTML 2023 - International Conference on History, Theory and Methodology of Learning
116

BL in teacher training
BL organisation for future teachers
the impact of BL on the academic achievements of future teachers
academic mobility of future teachers in the context of BL
BL in the formation of future teachers' professional competences
BL in the training of subjects teachers
teaching gifted children
using digital technologies in formal education
using digital technologies in non-formal education
determining the balance of BL parts
BL in teacher training
and retraining
BL in teacher retraining
analysing the organisation of emergency BL in the context of COVID-19
Research topics:
Figure 3: Research topics.
et al., 2022; Jenkins and Crawford, 2021; Joseph and
Trinick, 2021; Salonen et al., 2021; Abaci et al., 2021;
Glietenberg et al., 2022; Le and Pham, 2021) made it
possible to identify the following leading approaches
to BL organisation (figure 4):
• by the combination method:
– pre-planned combining of face-to-face, syn-
chronous and asynchronous distance learning
(Zagouras et al., 2022; Asghar et al., 2022;
Jen and Hoogeveen, 2022; Calder
´
on et al.,
2021; Mihret et al., 2022; Ridwan et al., 2020)
through BL design (Lami et al., 2021; Ridwan
et al., 2020; Abaci et al., 2021);
– emergency transition from full-time to distance
learning (Meulenbroeks, 2020; Sutiah et al.,
2020; Abaci et al., 2021; Glietenberg et al.,
2022);
– combining of full-time and part-time forms of
learning (Zagouras et al., 2022);
– combining learning on weekdays and weekends
(Zagouras et al., 2022);
– combining on-campus and distance learning
(Zagouras et al., 2022; S¸ent
¨
urk, 2021; Mihret
et al., 2022; Jen and Hoogeveen, 2022);
– combining learning in different physical loca-
tions that are related to the student’s educa-
tional and professional activities (Abaci et al.,
2021);
– combining teaching methods into learning
strategies (Ridwan et al., 2020);
• by ICT tools for BL:
– application of learning support systems: LMS
(Blackboard (Zagouras et al., 2022; Glieten-
berg et al., 2022), Moodle (Zagouras et al.,
2022; Jenkins and Crawford, 2021; Salonen
et al., 2021), Elena (Sumarni et al., 2021),
Google Classroom (Sutiah et al., 2020)) and
CMS (Ridwan et al., 2020);
– institutional training in open courses posted
on MOOC platforms (edX (Vielma Puente and
Ruano, 2021));
– application of software tools:
*
to assess learning achievements (Zagouras
et al., 2022; Meulenbroeks, 2020; S¸ ent
¨
urk,
2021);
Approaches to the Blended Learning Organisation
117

Approaches to BL organization:
by the
combination
method
pre-planned combining of face-to-face, synchronous
and asynchronous distance learning
emergency transition from full-time to distance learning
combining of full-time and part-time forms of learning
combining learning on weekdays and weekends
combining on-campus and distance learning
combining learning in different physical locations that are related
to the student's educational and professional activities
combining teaching methods into learning strategies
by ICT tools
application of learning support systems
institutional training in open courses posted on MOOC platforms
application of software tools
effective communication, interaction, and collaboration in the BL environment
teacher-led group and individual reflection on students' experience of using BL
tools in their own lessons
students' work in small groups
to assess learning achievements
by pedagogical
technologies
project approach
mobile learning, in particular, on-demand learning
gamification of learning
webinars and video conferences
VR and AR to create an immersive
learning environment
Internet platforms to support
cooperation and interaction between
students and teachers
artificial intelligence to improve
learning efficiency and personalize
the learning process
virtual manipulatives
simulators
multimedia
using hardware
external media with textbooks and
electronic library
mobiledesktop
Figure 4: Approaches to BL organization.
ICHTML 2023 - International Conference on History, Theory and Methodology of Learning
118

*
webinars (Zagouras et al., 2022; Jen and
Hoogeveen, 2022; Abaci et al., 2021) and
video conferences (Meulenbroeks, 2020; Su-
tiah et al., 2020; Abaci et al., 2021);
*
multimedia (Asghar et al., 2022) (in particu-
lar, informational videos, lecturer recordings
(Vielma Puente and Ruano, 2021; Lami et al.,
2021; Salonen et al., 2021; Le and Pham,
2021), video blogs (Jen and Hoogeveen,
2022), animations (S¸ ent
¨
urk, 2021), pre-
sentations (Ridwan et al., 2020; Le and
Pham, 2021), and other interactive materials
(Vielma Puente and Ruano, 2021));
*
virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality
(AR) to create an immersive learning environ-
ment (Fragkaki et al., 2020);
*
simulators (Mihret et al., 2022);
*
virtual manipulatives (Mihret et al., 2022);
*
artificial intelligence to improve learning ef-
ficiency and personalize the learning pro-
cess (Salonen et al., 2021; Posp
´
ı
ˇ
silov
´
a and
Rohl
´
ıkov
´
a, 2023);
*
Internet platforms to support cooperation and
interaction between students and teachers:
· social networks (Joseph and Trinick, 2021);
· messengers (WhatsApp (Asghar et al., 2022;
Kemaloglu Er and Bayyurt, 2022; Salonen
et al., 2021));
· e-mail (Asghar et al., 2022; Salonen et al.,
2021);
· online voting and surveys (Meulenbroeks,
2020; Vielma Puente and Ruano, 2021);
· online chats (Meulenbroeks, 2020; Calder
´
on
et al., 2021; S¸ent
¨
urk, 2021; Abaci et al.,
2021);
· online forums (Meulenbroeks, 2020;
S¸ ent
¨
urk, 2021; Ridwan et al., 2020; Ke-
maloglu Er and Bayyurt, 2022; Jenkins and
Crawford, 2021);
· virtual whiteboards (Vielma Puente and Ru-
ano, 2021);
– using hardware for BL implementation:
*
desktop (computers (Asghar et al., 2022));
*
mobile (laptops (Asghar et al., 2022; Jenkins
and Crawford, 2021), mobile phones (Asghar
et al., 2022; Kemaloglu Er and Bayyurt, 2022;
Jenkins and Crawford, 2021), tablets (Jenkins
and Crawford, 2021));
*
external media with textbooks and electronic
library (Asghar et al., 2022);
• by pedagogical technologies BL:
– effective communication, interaction, and col-
laboration in the BL environment (Zagouras
et al., 2022; S¸ent
¨
urk, 2021; Alsina Tarr
´
es et al.,
2022; Jenkins and Crawford, 2021; Joseph and
Trinick, 2021);
– teacher-led group and individual reflection on
students’ experience of using BL tools in their
own lessons (Zagouras et al., 2022; Jen and
Hoogeveen, 2022; Garcia-Ponce and Mora-
Pablo, 2020; Alsina Tarr
´
es et al., 2022; Jenkins
and Crawford, 2021);
– students’ work in small groups (Meulenbroeks,
2020; Joseph and Trinick, 2021);
– project approach (Garcia-Ponce and Mora-
Pablo, 2020; Sumarni et al., 2021; Joseph and
Trinick, 2021);
– mobile learning, in particular, on-demand
learning (Glietenberg et al., 2022; Jenkins and
Crawford, 2021);
– gamification of learning (Hooda et al., 2022;
Handle-Pfeiffer and Winter, 2021).
4 CONCLUSIONS
The identified approaches to BL organization provide
a number of advantages, including
• personalization: BL provides a more individual-
ized and adapted approach to learning, students
can work at their own speed and focus on their
specific needs and interests;
• increased engagement: the introduction of tech-
nology and online resources into the learning pro-
cess can increase student interest and motivation;
• flexibility: BL provides students more flexibility
in choosing when and where to study, and can ac-
commodate different learning styles;
• improved access to resources: BL gives students
access to a wider range of learning materials, such
as online videos and simulations, that may not be
available in a traditional classroom;
• increased efficiency: BL can increase the effi-
ciency of the learning process by allowing teach-
ers to use class time more efficiently and cover
more material;
• intellectualization of learning: using data to mon-
itor students’ progress and make changes to teach-
ing.
At the same time, BL is not without its weak-
nesses, including
• access to technology: for successful BL, teachers,
and students need to have access to appropriate
Approaches to the Blended Learning Organisation
119

hardware/software and the Internet. For some stu-
dents, especially those from low-income families,
this can be a barrier;
• technical difficulties: the use of technology can
be subject to technical difficulties and glitches,
which can disrupt the learning process and cause
frustration for both students and teachers;
• teacher/student training: both teachers and stu-
dents need training on how to integrate/use tech-
nology effectively, as well as support in navigat-
ing the various BL tools and platforms. As we can
see, many institutions have created special com-
missions/centers for teacher training or technical
support during BL or individual consultations, but
there are also cases of the absence of such a cen-
tralized policy in educational institutions.
REFERENCES
Abaci, S., Robertson, J., Linklater, H., and McNeill, F.
(2021). Supporting school teachers’ rapid engage-
ment with online education. Educational Technol-
ogy Research and Development, 69(1):29–34. https:
//doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09839-5.
Almendingen, K., Sparboe-Nilsen, B., Kvarme, L. G., and
Benth, J. S. (2021). Core Competencies for Interpro-
fessional Collaborative Practice Among Teacher Ed-
ucation, Health and Social Care Students in a Large
Scaled Blended Learning Course. Journal of Multi-
disciplinary Healthcare, 14:2249–2260. https://doi.
org/10.2147/JMDH.S325086.
Alsina Tarr
´
es, M., Masardo, A., Mallol Macau, C., and
Farr
´
es Cullell, I. (2022). Knowledge sharing among
teacher trainees in a transnational blended learn-
ing exchange. Revista Complutense de Educaci
´
on,
33(4):529–540. https://doi.org/10.5209/rced.76329.
Asghar, M. Z., Afzaal, M. N., Iqbal, J., and Sadia, H. A.
(2022). Analyzing an Appropriate Blend of Face-to-
Face, Offline and Online Learning Approaches for the
In-Service Vocational Teacher’s Training Program.
International Journal of Environmental Research and
Public Health, 19(17):10668. https://doi.org/10.3390/
ijerph191710668.
Bozkurt, A. (2022). A Retro Perspective on Blended/Hybrid
Learning: Systematic Review, Mapping and Visual-
ization of the Scholarly Landscape. Journal of Inter-
active Media in Education, 2022(1):2. https://doi.org/
10.5334/jime.751.
Bruggeman, B., Hidding, K., Struyven, K., Pynoo, B.,
Garone, A., and Tondeur, J. (2022). Negotiating
teacher educators’ beliefs about blended learning:
Using stimulated recall to explore design choices.
Australasian Journal of Educational Technology,
38(2):98–112. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.7175.
Calder
´
on, A., Scanlon, D., MacPhail, A., and Moody, B.
(2021). An integrated blended learning approach
for physical education teacher education programmes:
teacher educators’ and pre-service teachers’ expe-
riences. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy,
26(6):562–577. https://doi.org/10.1080/17408989.
2020.1823961.
Fragkaki, M., Mystakidis, S., and Filippousis, G. (2020).
Work-in-Progress-Design and Evaluation of an Aug-
mented and Virtual Reality Flipped-Learning Course
for K-12 Educators. In Proceedings of 6th Inter-
national Conference of the Immersive Learning Re-
search Network, iLRN 2020, pages 275–278. https:
//doi.org/10.23919/iLRN47897.2020.9155200.
Garcia-Ponce, E. E. and Mora-Pablo, I. (2020). Chal-
lenges of using a blended learning approach: A
flipped classroom in an English teacher education pro-
gram in Mexico. Higher Learning Research Commu-
nications, 10(2):116–133. https://doi.org/10.18870/
HLRC.V10I2.1209.
Glietenberg, S. H., Petersen, N., and Carolin, A.
(2022). Teacher educators’ experiences of the shift
to remote teaching and learning due to COVID-
19. South African Journal of Childhood Edu-
cation, 12(1):a1189. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajce.
v12i1.1189.
Handle-Pfeiffer, D. and Winter, C. (2021). Playing and Re-
flecting Games: The Production of Gamified Learning
Artefacts in Teacher Education. Journal of Higher Ed-
ucation Theory and Practice, 21(16):164–176. https:
//doi.org/10.33423/jhetp.v21i16.4923.
Harangus, K., Horv
´
ath, Z.-I., and Kov
´
acs, G.
(2021). Changes and perspectives in teacher
training methodology. Acta Universi-
tatis Sapientiae, Philologica, 13(2):55–70.
https://doi.org/10.2478/ausp-2021-0013.
Herliana, F., Farhan, A., Elisa, Syukri, M., and Mahzum,
E. (2021). Perception of Novice Learners Using
Blended Learning Approach During the Covid-19
Pandemic. Journal of Physics: Conference Series,
2019(1):012032. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/
2019/1/012032.
Hooda, A., Nousiainen, T., Vesisenaho, M., Ahlstrom, E.,
Fort, S., Subirats, L., and Sacha, G. M. (2022). School
of Digital Wizards: Exploring the Gamification User
Types in a Blended IT Course. In 2022 IEEE Fron-
tiers in Education Conference (FIE), pages 1–5, Los
Alamitos, CA, USA. IEEE Computer Society. https:
//doi.org/10.1109/FIE56618.2022.9962592.
Iyer, S. S., Gernal, L., Subramanian, R., and Mehrotra, A.
(2023). Impact of digital disruption influencing busi-
ness continuity in UAE higher education. Educational
Technology Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.
29.
Jen, E. and Hoogeveen, L. (2022). Design an international
blended professional development model for gifted
education: An evaluation study. Evaluation and Pro-
gram Planning, 91:102034. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
evalprogplan.2021.102034.
Jenkins, L. and Crawford, R. (2021). Pre-service Music
Teachers’ Understanding of Blended Learning: Im-
plications for Teaching Post COVID-19. Australian
ICHTML 2023 - International Conference on History, Theory and Methodology of Learning
120

Journal of Teacher Education, 46(7):86–92. https:
//doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2021v46n7.5.
Jiang, Y., Wang, P., Li, Q., and Li, Y. (2022). Stu-
dents’ Intention toward Self-Regulated Learning un-
der Blended Learning Setting: PLS-SEM Approach.
Sustainability, 14(16):10140. https://doi.org/10.3390/
su141610140.
Joseph, D. and Trinick, R. (2021). ‘Staying Apart Yet
Keeping Together’: Challenges and Opportunities of
Teaching During COVID-19 Across the Tasman. New
Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 56(2):209–
226. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40841-021-00211-6.
Keengwe, J. and Kang, J.-J. (2013). A review of em-
pirical research on blended learning in teacher edu-
cation programs. Education and Information Tech-
nologies, 18(3):479–493. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10639-011-9182-8.
Kemaloglu Er, E. and Bayyurt, Y. (2022). Implementation
of Blended Learning in English as a Lingua Franca
(Elf)-Aware Pre-Service Teacher Education. Turkish
Online Journal of Distance Education, 23(1):60–73.
https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.1050353.
Kovalchuk, V. I., Maslich, S. V., and Movchan, L. H.
(2023). Digitalization of vocational education under
crisis conditions. Educational Technology Quarterly,
2023(1):1–17. https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.49.
Lami, R., Gastineau, S., Flom, H., and Desdevises, Y.
(2021). Big Steps, Little Change: A Case Study in
French University Teachers’ Cognitions in the Con-
text of Pedagogical Innovation. Frontiers in Educa-
tion, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.765771.
Le, P. T. and Pham, H. T. T. (2021). Using Blended Learn-
ing in Teacher Training Programs: Perspectives of
Pre-service Teachers. Journal of Educational and So-
cial Research, 11(2):115. https://doi.org/10.36941/
jesr-2021-0035.
Lorenza, L. and Carter, D. (2021). Emergency online
teaching during COVID-19: A case study of Aus-
tralian tertiary students in teacher education and cre-
ative arts. International Journal of Educational Re-
search Open, 2:100057. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijedro.2021.100057.
Meulenbroeks, R. (2020). Suddenly fully online: A
case study of a blended university course moving
online during the COVID-19 pandemic. Heliyon,
6(12):e05728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.
e05728.
Mihret, Z., Alemu, M., and Assefa, S. (2022). Effects of
Blending Virtual and Real Laboratory Experimenta-
tion on Pre-Service Physics Teachers’ Attitudes To-
ward Physics Electricity and Magnetism Laborato-
ries. Science Education International, 33(3):313–
322. https://www.icaseonline.net/journal/index.php/
sei/article/view/434.
Posp
´
ı
ˇ
silov
´
a, L. and Rohl
´
ıkov
´
a, L. (2023). Reforming higher
education with eportfolio implementation, enhanced
by learning analytics. Computers in Human Behav-
ior, 138:107449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.
107449.
Ridwan, R., Hamid, H., and Aras, I. (2020). Blended
Learning in Research Statistics Course at The En-
glish Education Department of Borneo Tarakan Uni-
versity. International Journal of Emerging Technolo-
gies in Learning, 15(07):61–73. https://doi.org/10.
3991/ijet.v15i07.13231.
Salonen, A. O., Tapani, A., and Suhonen, S. (2021). Stu-
dent Online Activity in Blended Learning: A Learn-
ing Analytics Perspective of Professional Teacher
Education Studies in Finland. SAGE Open,
11(4):21582440211056612. https://doi.org/10.1177/
21582440211056612.
S¸ ent
¨
urk, C. (2021). Effects of the blended learning model
on preservice teachers’ academic achievements and
twenty-first century skills. Education and Information
Technologies, 26(1):35–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10639-020-10340-y.
Short, C. R., Graham, C. R., Holmes, T., Oviatt, L., and
Bateman, H. (2021). Preparing Teachers to Teach in
K-12 Blended Environments: A Systematic Mapping
Review of Research Trends, Impact, and Themes.
TechTrends, 65(6):993–1009. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11528-021-00626-4.
Staker, H. and Horn, M. B. (2012). Classifying K-12
blended learning. Innosight Institute, Boston, MA.
Sumarni, W., Sudarmin, S., and Kadarwati, S. (2021).
Creative skill improvement of the teacher candidates
in designing learning programs through a project-
based blended learning. Journal of Physics: Confer-
ence Series, 1918(3):032026. https://doi.org/10.1088/
1742-6596/1918/3/032026.
Sutiah, S., Slamet, S., Shafqat, A., and Supriyono, S.
(2020). Implementation of distance learning dur-
ing the COVID-19 pandemic in faculty of education
and teacher training. Cypriot Journal of Educational
Sciences, 15(5):1204–1214. https://doi.org/10.18844/
CJES.V15I5.5151.
Theelen, H., Willems, M. C., van den Beemt, A., Conijn,
R., and den Brok, P. (2020). Virtual internships in
blended environments to prepare preservice teachers
for the professional teaching context. British Journal
of Educational Technology, 51(1):194–210. https://
doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12760.
Vielma Puente, J. E. and Ruano, M. A. (2021). Analy-
sis of the usefulness of the basic program of teacher
training in a blended learning modality. Estudios
pedag
´
ogicos (Valdivia), 47:289–298. https://doi.org/
10.4067/S0718-07052021000200289.
Yan, Y. and Chen, H. (2021). Developments and Emerg-
ing Trends of Blended Learning: A Document Co-
citation Analysis (2003–2020). International Journal
of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 16(24):149–
164. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v16i24.25971.
Zagouras, C., Egarchou, D., Skiniotis, P., and Foun-
tana, M. (2022). Face to face or blended learn-
ing? A case study: Teacher training in the ped-
agogical use of ICT. Education and Information
Technologies, 27(9):12939–12967. https://doi.org/10.
1007/s10639-022-11144-y.
Approaches to the Blended Learning Organisation
121