ISSN: 2222-6990
Open access
The rapid integration of blended learning in higher education has highlighted the importance of structured and multidimensional support systems in enhancing student engagement. This study investigates the relationship between students’ perceived learning support and their engagement in blended learning environments. Using Pearson correlation analysis, the study examines four dimensions of perceived learning support: teacher support, emotional support, peer support, and technical support. The findings reveal significant positive correlations between all support dimensions and blended learning engagement, with peer support (r = 0.506, p < 0.01) and overall perceived learning support (r = 0.515, p < 0.01) demonstrating the strongest relationships. The results suggest that a comprehensive support system plays a crucial role in fostering active participation and sustained engagement among students. The study concludes that strengthening institutional, interpersonal, and technological support mechanisms can significantly improve the effectiveness of blended learning environments.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Freeman.
Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Borokhovski, E., Wade, C. A., Tamim, R. M., Surkes, M. A., & Bethel, E. C. (2009). A meta-analysis of three types of interaction treatments in distance education. Review of Educational Research, 79(3), 1243–1289.
Bolliger, D. U., & Martin, F. (2018). Instructor and student perceptions of online student engagement strategies. Distance Education, 39(4), 568–583.
Chen, P. S. D., Lambert, A. D., & Guidry, K. R. (2010). Engaging online learners: The impact of web-based learning technology on college student engagement. Computers & Education, 54(4), 1222–1232.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (8th ed.). Routledge.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Sage.
Dixson, M. D. (2015). Measuring student engagement in the online course: The Online Student Engagement scale (OSE). Online Learning, 19(4), 143–157.
Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1–4.
Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (4th ed.). Sage.
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109.
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2–3), 87–105.
Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2008). Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles, and guidelines. Jossey-Bass.
Graham, C. R. (2006). Blended learning systems: Definition, current trends, and future directions. In C. J. Bonk & C. R. Graham (Eds.), The handbook of blended learning (pp. 3–21). Pfeiffer.
Hrastinski, S. (2008). Asynchronous and synchronous e-learning. Educause Quarterly, 31(4), 51–55.
Kahu, E. R. (2013). Framing student engagement in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 38(5), 758–773.
Kuh, G. D. (2009). What student affairs professionals need to know about student engagement. Journal of College Student Development, 50(6), 683–706.
Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 140, 1–55.
Martin, F., & Bolliger, D. U. (2018). Engagement matters: Student perceptions on the importance of engagement strategies. Online Learning, 22(1), 205–222.
Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2010). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning. U.S. Department of Education.
Moore, M. G. (1993). Theory of transactional distance. In D. Keegan (Ed.), Theoretical principles of distance education (pp. 22–38). Routledge.
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Picciano, A. G. (2009). Blending with purpose: The multimodal model. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 13(1), 7–18.
Richardson, J. C., & Swan, K. (2003). Examining social presence in online courses. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(1), 68–88.
Shea, P., & Bidjerano, T. (2009). Community of inquiry as a theoretical framework. Computers & Education, 52(3), 543–553.
Sun, J. C. Y., & Rueda, R. (2012). Situational interest, computer self-efficacy, and self-regulation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(2), 191–204.
Tinto, V. (1997). Classrooms as communities: Exploring the educational character of student persistence. The Journal of Higher Education, 68(6), 599–623.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Wang, M. T., & Eccles, J. S. (2012). Social support matters: Longitudinal effects on student engagement. Child Development, 83(3), 877–895.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70.
Zhao, Y., Lei, J., Yan, B., Lai, C., & Tan, H. S. (2005). What makes the difference? A practical analysis of research on the effectiveness of distance education. American Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 293–324.
Xingtian, X., & Maniam, M. (2026). A Study on Students’ Perceived Learning Support and Engagement in Blended Learning Environments. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 16(4), 197–203.
Copyright: © 2026 The Author(s)
Published by HRMARS (www.hrmars.com)
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this license may be seen at: http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode