Printer Friendly

Digital Disruption in Higher Learning Education: The Implementation of Blended Learning For Undergraduates.


Blended learning is a learning system that combines the traditional classroom method of face-to-face classroom practices with computer-mediated activities via Internet and digital media regarding its context and delivery and require the physical presence of both teacher and students. Falconer and Littlejohn (2007) defined blended learning as a mixture of traditional face-to-face and online learning that occurs both in the classroom and online platform, where the online element come to be an established addendum of the traditional classroom learning.

Blended learning is a prevalent learning approach between higher learning institution since its coordinates up close and personal instructing with online learning. Due of the expanded utilization of blended learning, there is desperation in measuring blended learning quality through student's satisfaction (Rahman et al., 2015). The rise of innovation has turned into an upper hand for higher learning institution as it can give an option approach in giving better nature of learning. There were also lack of literature in determining the satisfaction among undergraduates in blended learning.

The higher learning institution are basically gone up against the possibility of a limit learning as a method for giving undergraduates the chance to think about the world over the prior decade (Arbaugh, 2014). Blended learning has turned into a notable innovation based approach utilizing both open and private advanced education organizations particularly in Malaysia (Rahman et al., 2015). The aim of this study is to determine the factors influencing satisfaction on blended learning among undergraduate students.

Literature Review

Social Cognitive Theory

The social cognitive theory is used as the main underlying theory and it was previously used by Foley and Lytle (2015) in determining the user satisfaction. Social cognitive theory is generally accepted and validated empirically as a base to ascertain how human behaviour can be understood and predict how humans will react in terms of satisfaction (Wu et al., 2010). Higher learning institutions must cope with the shifting expectations on the standard of the learning experience and the flow of wave of technological changes. Based on the research by Kuh et al. (2005), students of higher learning institutions believe that knowledgeable and significant learning experiences will only be supported by actively engaged teachers, thus the students are questioning the traditional learning methods and whether the students will actually able to attain high level of learning as guaranteed by the institutions.

Hypothesis Development

(i) Perceived ease of use

As defined by Igbaria et al. (1995), PEOU has been inveterate from past researches to be of a major factor in exerting impact in user acceptance and the usage behaviour of information technologies. PEOU consists of the following factors: easy to use, easy to read, using understandable terms, able to link to search for related information and easy to return to previous pages. Thus, in terms of blended learning's satisfaction, it shows that users who consider reusing e-learning tools believe that it is useful and easy to use. This in line with the research of Joo, Lim, and Kim (2011) who found that users play a role in increasing the positive attitude towards the e-learning tools intervention. Additionally, a past research by Wu and Liu (2013) has established that PEOU and students' satisfaction has a significant positive relationship. H1: There is a significant positive relationship between perceived ease of use and students' satisfaction towards blended learning.

(ii) Perceived value

A research by Borstorff and Lowe (2007) described that in order to find out the impact of perceived value on the students' satisfaction level of e-learning, the students must identify whether by using e-learning it will allow them to study at a higher learning institution while being able to either keep up with their own careers or the ability to go after their individual goals. Another research related to perceived value would be of Entmer et al. (2008), where the students-instructors' interaction plays a role in the value of information acquired and taught in the classroom.

H2: There is a significant positive relationship between perceived value and students' satisfaction towards blended learning.

(iii) Learning climate

Learning climate as defined by Prieto and Revilla (2006) is the academic ambience in the circumstance of blended environment learning system. Wei and Chen (2008) defines it as the interaction among students and teachers in class, physical setting and study materials. Naaj et al (2012) on the other hand defined that learning climate is a situation where interaction and cooperation are permitted and reassured that will result to a positive learning outcomes. Similarly, Sher (2009) and Rahman (2015) also believes that learning climate inspires shared learning experiences, erects a feeling of populace among students, and underpins teamwork. H3: There is a significant positive relationship between learning climate and students' satisfaction towards blended learning.

(iv) Student-instructor interaction

Prior research by Wu et al. (2010) proposed that confidence and cooperation between the learners and the teachers coaxes and motivates favourable learning climate that will in turn ease the bandying of ideas, opinions, information and knowledge. Another research by Marzano (2003) induced that an effective teacher-student relationships built plays a significant role in a student's academic growth. A further research by Hallinan (2008) shows that learning is a process that involves both the cognition and social dimensions impacted in classes, where it is best for both processes of teaching and acquiring knowledge.Meyer and Turner (2002) results elucidates the significance of both the learners and the teachers' emotions during the instructional interactions. The researchers has pinpointed that the conceptualisation of what represents motivation and the variant that will increase the motivation is when the emotions involved, which results in that interpersonal relationships between students and teachers have a positive impact on the satisfaction of learning. This research is also in line with another research made by Downey (2008).

H4: There is a significant positive relationship between student-instructor interaction and students' satisfaction towards blended learning.


Type of Research and Data Collection Procedure

The purpose of this research is to test the hypothesis which to describe the relationship between dependent and independent variable. This research exercise quantitative analysis to describe phenomenon by obtaining the numerical data from primary data and analyse based on mathematically method. Hence, correlation study will be used to describe the relationship between four variables and to highlight the significant variable associated with the problem. Correlation study and may indicate that there is relationship between variable but it also does not mean that one variable can cause a change in another variable.

The data source for this study is primary data. Questionnaire were chosen as the data collection method because this study involves a large number of students from two different universities. It is quite difficult to use method such as interview when a large number of students are involved. This questionnaire were distribute through electronic questionnaire method in both universities.

Population and Sample

In this research, the target population is the undergraduate students from one public university and one private university; respectively Universiti Teknologi Mara (UiTM) and Universiti Tenaga Nasional (UNITEN). The total number of students for each university would be a roundup number of population. The final sample for this study is 476 students comprises of 230 public university undergraduates and 246 private university undergraduates to the total of 476 undergraduates. Sampling techniques that were used in this study is convenience sampling technique.

Measurement of Variables

In this study, there are two types of variables, which are dependent variables and independent variable. Dependent variable consists of blended learning's satisfaction. Satisfaction were measured using five Likert scale, from strongly dissatisfied to strongly satisfiedIndependent variables were measured using similar method, which is five likert scale from strongly disagree to strongly agree.


Descriptive Analysis on Demographic Information

From Table 1, it shows the sample is selected from both public and private universities. The sample is not evenly distributed, with public university sample of 230 with 48.3%, while private university sample is 246 with 51.7%. Therefore, the total sample of the population is 476 students. Overall, the sample comprised of 46.2% of male students and 53.8% of female students. The total of male students is 220 which 90 from public university and 130 from private university. The majority of the respondents is female students which is 256 students from public and private university which 140 and 116 respectively.

Based on Table 1, 76.7% (365 students) of total sample comprised of Malay ethnicity, 3.8% (18 students) comprised of Chinese ethnicity, 13.2% (63 students) comprised of Indian ethnicity, while 6.3% (30 students) comprised of other category of ethnicity. Next, the sample also can be divided according to their year of study in Bachelor of Accounting (Hons.). The total sample comprised of 11.3% of first year students, 32.4% of second year students, 35.9% of third year students and 20.4% of fourth year students. The majority of respondents from public university are from second year students which are 84 students whereas third year students is the majority from private university by 105 students.

In addition, the Table 1 also shows that the respondents of the study, majority have CGPA of 3.0 and above with 50.6% of total sample which is 241 students. The respondents with 3.5 and above CGPA contribute 24.2% (115 students) whereas the respondents with 2.5 and above contribute 18.5% (88 students). CGPA of 2.0 and above contributes 5.7% with 27 students, while 1.1% of total population (5 students) responded to Other CGPA.

Descriptive analysis on independent and dependent variables

Based on Table 2, the mean for perceived value is 3.855, showing that most undergraduate agree that blended learning adding value to their learning methods. The standard deviation for perceived value is 0.69880 and for the variance is 0.488. Moreover, for perceived ease of use, the mean value is 3.7703 which is most of the students agree that blended learning is easy to learn and less difficult to implementing it. The student-instructor interaction's mean is 3.7775 and learning climate's mean is 3.8422 which is the highest value among the variables. Lastly, for satisfaction, the mean value is 3.8336. Most of the student were satisfied with the implementation of blended learning in their universities.

Reliability Analysis

Based on Table 3, the cronbach's alpha value for Perceived Value is excellent, with the figure of more than 0.9. Cronbach's Alpha of 0.809 for perceived ease of use is good, meaning that the perceived ease of use is also considered as reliable. Student-Instructor Interaction with cronbach's alpha more than 0.8 for both institutions are considered good and acceptable. Next, learning climate portrays good result which is more than 0.8 for both higher institutions. The Satisfaction on blended learning generated a cronbach's alpha of 0.800 . It is a good result for the private institution and also for the public institution based on the rule of thumb. For this study, all of the variables are reliable and acceptable.

Correlation Analysis

Based on table 4, the correlation value for perceived ease of use is 0.627 and the correlation is significant at the 0.01 level. This result support from a past research Wu and Liu, (2013), Chen and Yao (2016) and Joo et al. (2011). It is shown that the use of e-learning tools is useful and easy to use for in the learning process. On the other hand, the correlation value for perceived value related student is 0.619 and the correlation is significant at the 0.01 level. This result related with study from Davis et al. (1989), Johnston et al. (2005), and Borstorff and Lowe (2007). Furthermore, the correlation value for learning climate is 0.751 and the correlation is significant at the 0.01 level. This result shows significant relationship between the variables for both private and public university. It is similar to the study done by Naaj et al (2012), Wei and Chen (2008), and Sher (2009). Lastly, the correlation value for student-instructor interaction is 0.701 and the correlation is significant at the 0.01 level. This result shows the significant relationship between the variables. This result related with finding by Downey (2008), Marzano (2003), and Meyer and Turner (2002).

In overall correlation value are positive and significant for all variables for private and public university. The correlation value is strong for all independent variables. This show all the independent variables are having significant influence over satisfaction in blended learning among undergraduates.

Discussion and Conclusion

This study is conducted to learn the determinants of blended learning satisfaction in higher learning institution. This study is based on the evidence from accounting students from public and private university, based on questionnaires answered by students in the respected universities. There are several determinants affecting student's satisfaction are focused on and had adapted the five-point Likert Scale from past research in order to develop new scale instrument. The result of this study shows that all four independent variables are significant.


Abou Naaj M. Nachouki M. and Ankit A. (2012). Evaluating student satisfaction with blended learning in a gender-segregated environment, Journal of Information Technology Education, 11, 185-200 2012.

Arbaugh, J. B. (2014). What might online delivery teach us about blended management education? Prior perspectives and future directions, Journal of Management Education, 38 (6), 784-817.

Borstorff, P.C. and Lowe, S.K. (2007). Students perceptions and opinions toward e- learning in the college environment, Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 11 (2), 13-29.

Chen, Won Sun, and Adrian Yong Tat Yao (2016). An empirical evaluation of critical factors influencing learner satisfaction in blended learning: A pilot study, Universal Journal of Educational Research, 4(7), 1667-1671.

Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P., and Warshaw, P.R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of tow theoretical models, Management Science, 35 (8), 982- 1003.

Downey, J.A. (2008). Recommendations for fostering educational resilience in the Classroom, Preventing School Failure, 53, 56-63.

Ertmer, P., Temur Gedik, N., Richardson, J. and Newby, T. (2008). Perceived value of online discussions: perceptions of engineering and education students. In J. Luca and E. Weippl (Eds.), Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2008--World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications, 4679-4687.

Falconer, I., and Littlejohn, A. (2007). Designing for blended learning, sharing and reuse, Journal of Further and Higher Education, 31 (1) 41-52.

Foley, Pamela F., and Megan C. Lytle (2015). Social Cognitive Career Theory, the Theory of Work Adjustment, and Work Satisfaction of Retirement-Age Adults, Journal of career development, 42 (3), 199-214.

Hallinan, M.T. (2008). Teacher influences on students' attachment to school, Sociology of Education, 81(3), 271-283.

Igbaria, M., Iivari, J. and Maragahh, H. (1995). Why do individuals use computer technology? A Finnish case study. Information & Management, 29, 227-238.

Johnston, J., Killion, J., and Oomen, J. (2005). Student satisfaction in the virtual classroom, The Internet Journal of Allied Health Sciences and Practice, 3(2).

Joo, Y. J., Lim, K. Y., and Kim, E. K. (2011). Online university students' satisfaction and persistence: Examining perceived level of presence, usefulness and ease of use as predictors in a structural model, Computers & Education, 57(2), 1654-1664.

Kuh, G.D., Kinzie, J., Schuh, J.H., and Whitt, E.J. (2005). Never let it rest: Lessons about student success from high-performing colleges and universities, Change, 37(4), 44-51.

Marzano, R.J.,(2003). What works in schools translating research into action. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Book publication.

Meyer, D.K., and Turner, J.C. (2002). Discovering emotion in classroom motivation research, Educational Psychologist, 37(2), 107-114.

Prieto, I.M., and Revilla, E. (2006). Formal and informal facilitators of learning capability: the moderating effect of learning climate. IE Working Paper.

Rahman, N.A.A, Hussein, N. & Aluwi, A.H. (2015). Satisfaction on Blended Learning in a Public Higher Education Institution: What Factors Matter?, Social and Behavioral Sciences, 211, 768-775.

Sekaran, U. and Bougie, R. (2013). Research methods for business a skill-building approach. 6th Edition, Wiley, New York.

Sher, A. (2009). Assessing the relationship of student-instructor and student- student interaction to student learning and satisfaction in Web-based Online Learning Environment, Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 8(2), 102-120.

Wei, C.-W., and Chen, Y.-R. (2008). Classroom climate and learning effectiveness in holistic blended learning environments, Taiwan International Journal on Digital Learning Technology, 1(1), 72-92.

Wu, Jen-Her, Robert D. Tennyson, and Tzyh-Lih Hsia (2010). A study of student satisfaction in a blended e-learning system environment, Computers & Education, 55 (1), 155-164.

Wu, Jinxiu, and Wenyu Liu (2013). An empirical investigation of the critical factors affecting students' satisfaction in EFL blended learning, Journal of Language Teaching & Research, 4 (1), 176-185.

Zaifudin Zainol (*)

College of Business and Accounting, Universiti Tenaga Nasional, Malaysia Email:

Muhammad Omar Imran Mohd Zahari

Universiti Tenaga Nasional

Muhammad Haris Mazlan

Universiti Tenaga Nasional

Hamidah Mohammad Shah @ Abdul Kadir

Universiti Tenaga Nasional

(*) Corresponding Author
Table 1: Descriptive Analysis on Demographic Information

                      Frequency       Percentage      (%)
                Public  Private  Total  Public  Private  Total

University       230    246      476    48.3     51.7    100
(i)Female        140    116      256    29.4     24.4     53.8
(ii) Male         90    130      220    18.9     27.3     46.2
(i)Malay         209    156      365    43.9     32.8     76.7
(ii) Chinese       2     16       18     0.4      3.4      3.8
(iii) Indian       3     60       63     0.6     12.6     13.2
(iv) Other        16     14       30     3.4      2.9      6.3
Current Year
of Studies:
(i) 1st year      52      2       54    10.9      0.4     11.3
(ii) 2nd year     84     70      154    17.6     14.8     32.4
(iii) 3rd year    66    105      171    13.9     22       35.9
(iv) 4th year     28     69       97     5.9     14.5     20.4
(i) 3.5 >         46     69      115     9.7     14.5     24.2
(ii) 3.0 >       137    104      241    28.8     21.8     50.6
(iii) 2.5 >       31     57       88     6.5     12       18.5
(iv) 2.0 >        11     16       27     2.3      3.4      5.7
(v) Other          5      0        5     1.1      0        1.1

Table 2: Descriptive Analysis on Independent and Dependent Variables

                    PV       PEU      SII      LC       SATISFACTION

Mean                3.8115   3.7703   3.7775   3.8422   3.8336
Mode                4.00     4.00     4.00     3.67     4.00
Standard Deviation  0.69880  0.70751  0.66425  0.61091  0.63362
Variance            0.488    0.501    0.441    0.373    0.401

Table 3: Reliability Analysis

                                Cronbach's Alpha

Perceived Value                     0.906
Perceived Ease of Use               0.809
Student-Instructor Interaction      0.852
Learning Climate                    0.836
Satisfaction                        0.800

Table 4: Spearman Rho Correlation Table

                                             PV          PEU

Perceived ease of use  Spearman correlation   .609 (**)   1.000
                       Sig. (2-tailed)       0.000
Perceived value        Spearman correlation  1.000       .609 (**)
related students       Sig. (2-tailed)                   0.000
Learning climate       Spearman correlation   .607 (**)   .593 (**)
                       Sig. (2-tailed)       0.000       0.000
Student instructor     Spearman correlation   .678 (**)   .569 (**)
interaction            Sig. (2-tailed)       0.000       0.000
Satisfaction on                               .619 (**)   .627 (**)
blended learning       Spearman correlation
                       Sig. (2-tailed)       0.000       0.000

                       SII         LC          S

Perceived ease of use   .569 (**)   .593 (**)   .627 (**)
                       0.000       0.000       0.000
Perceived value         .678 (**)   .607 (**)   .619 (**)
related students       0.000       0.000       0.000
Learning climate        .696 (**)  1.000        .751 (**)
                       0.000                   0.000
Student instructor     1.000        .696 (**)   .701 (**)
interaction                        0.000       0.000
Satisfaction on         .701 (**)   .751 (**)  1.000
blended learning
                       0.000       0.000

(**). Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
COPYRIGHT 2018 Global Business and Management Research: An International Journal
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2018 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Zainol, Zaifudin; Zahari, Muhammad Omar Imran Mohd; Mazlan, Muhammad Haris; Kadir, Hamidah Mohammad
Publication:Global Business and Management Research: An International Journal
Geographic Code:9MALA
Date:Apr 1, 2018
Previous Article:Determinants Influencing Employability Skills: Undergraduate Perception.
Next Article:Mental Health Indicators among Generation Y.

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2022 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters |