ISSN: 2226-6348
Open access
With the reform and development of globalized education, blended learning has become a commonly used learning model in higher education. Nevertheless, there are differences in the implementation of blended learning between public and private universities due to the distinct characteristics of these two types of institutions.This study examined the perceptions of blended learning among students and teachers from one public and one private university. The findings indicate that both groups recognize the benefits of blended learning, such as improved student performance, diversified teaching methods, and increased student interest. However, differences emerged: public university students criticized outdated online content, while private universities effectively met student needs with up-to-date materials. Private university students, who often struggle with foundational skills and EFL(English as a Foreign Language) interest, benefit from the engaging and diverse nature of blended learning. Enhanced teacher supervision in private universities also helps cultivate better study habits. Additionally, private universities’ financial flexibility allows for timely adoption of new technologies and resources, making them more responsive to current issues. Interviews with EFL heads further highlight that private universities focus on current adjustments, while public universities plan for future trends. Overall, private universities appear better equipped to leverage the advantages of blended learning for improved EFL outcomes.
McDiarmid, G. W., & Zhao, Y. (2023). Time to rethink: educating for a technology-transformed world. ECNU Review of Education, 6(2), 189-214.
Altay, I. F., & Altay, A. (2019). A Review of Studies on Blended Learning in EFL Environment. International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 11(1), 125-140.
Atwa, H., Shehata, M. H., Al-Ansari, A., Kumar, A., Jaradat, A., Ahmed, J., & Deifalla, A. (2022). Online, face-to-face, or blended learning? Faculty and medical students' perceptions during the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed-method study. Frontiers in medicine.
Babacan, ?. & Ceviz, M. (2022). Public school and private school geography teachers’ views of distance education. International Journal of Geography and Geography Education (IGGE), 45, 53-66. http://dx.doi.org/10.32003/igge.935366
Broadbent, J. (2017). Comparing online and blended learner's self-regulated learning strategies and academic performance. The Internet and Higher Education, 33, 24-32.
Cao, Y., Jeyaraj, J. J., & Razali, A. B. (2024). Attitudes and Perceptions of English as a Foreign Language Students on Blended Learning and Learner Autonomy in a Private University of China. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 23(1), 549-571.
Cleland, J. A. (2017). The qualitative orientation in medical education research. Korean journal of medical education, 29(2), 61.
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. SAGE.
Medina, L. (2018). Blended learning: Deficits and prospects in higher education. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 34(1).
Dakhi, O., JAMA, J., & IRFAN, D. (2020). Blended learning: a 21st century learning model at college. International Journal Of Multi Science, 1(08), 50-65.
Dangwal, K. L. (2017). Blended learning: An innovative approach. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 5(1), 129-136.
Dearnley, C. (2005). A reflection on the use of semi-structured interviews. Nurse researcher, 13(1).
Deephouse, D. L., & Suchman, M. (2008). Legitimacy in organizational institutionalism. The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism, 49, 77.
Ding, Z. (2021). Research on the application status and countermeasures of college english blended teaching model under big data. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1955). IOP Publishing.
Hoxie, A. M., Stillman, J., & Chesal, K. (2013). Blended learning in New York City. Blended Learning: Research Perspectives, Volume 2, 2, 196.
Jong, B., & Tan, K. H. (2021). Using Padlet as a Technological Tool for Assessment of Students' Writing Skills in Online Classroom Settings. International Journal of Education and Practice, 9(2), 411-423.
Ju, S. Y., & Mei, S. Y. (2018). Perceptions and practices of blended learning in foreign language teaching at USIM. European Journal of Social Sciences Education and Research, 12(1), 170. DOI:10.26417/ejser. v12i1. p170-176.
Lin, J., Zhang, Y., Gao, L., & Liu, Y. (2005). Trust, ownership, and autonomy: Challenges facing private higher education in China. China Review, 61-81.
Margolis, A. A. (2018). What kind of blending makes blended learning. Psikhologicheskaya nauka i obrazovanie= Psychological Science and Education, 23(3), 5-19.
Marshall, B., Cardon, P., Poddar, A., & Fontenot, R. (2013). Does sample size matter in qualitative research?: A review of qualitative interviews in IS research. Journal of computer information systems, 54(1), 11-22.
Mozelius, P., & Rydell, C. (2017). Blended learning, Virtual learning environment, Technology-enhanced learning. Higher education, E-learning. ICTEJoumal, 6(1), 4-13.
Naidu, P., & Derani, N. E. S. (2016). A comparative study on quality of education received by students of private universities versus public universities. Procedia Economics and Finance, 35, 659-666.
Ocak, M. A. (2011). Why are faculty members not teaching blended courses? Insights from faculty members. Computers & Education, 56(3), 689–699.
Pappano L. (2015). Learning to think outside the box. Courrier Japan, ,11: 30-33
Peng, R., & Fu, R. (2021). The effect of Chinese EFL students’ learning motivation on learning outcomes within a blended learning environment. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 37(6), 61-74.
Peterson, J. S. (2019). Presenting a qualitative study: A reviewer’s perspective. Gifted Child Quarterly, 63(3), 147-158.
Poon, J. (2013). Blended learning: An institutional approach for enhancing students' learning experiences. Journal of online learning and teaching, 9(2), 271.
Radovan, M., & Kristl, N. (2017). Acceptance of Technology and Its Impact on Teachers' Activities in Virtual Classroom: Integrating UTAUT and CoI into a Combined Model. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 16(3), 11-22.
Rahim, M. N. (2019). The use of blended learning approach in EFL education. International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology, 8(5), 1165-1168.
Rasheed, R. A., Kamsin, A., & Abdullah, N. A. (2020). Challenges in the online component of blended learning: A systematic review. Computers & education, 144, 103701.
Sandanayake, T. C. (2019). Promoting open educational resources-based blended learning. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), 1-16.
Wai, C. C., & Seng, E. L. K. (2015). Measuring the effectiveness of blended learning environment: A case study in Malaysia. Education and Information Technologies, 20(3), 429–443.
Wang, H. R., & Nuttall, H. (2018). Blended Learning in China: At the Crossroads. In Online Course Management: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications (pp.1399–1419). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-5472-1.ch073
Wang, N., Chen, J., Tai, M., & Zhang, J. (2021). Blended learning for Chinese university EFL learners: Learning environment and learner perceptions. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 34(3), 297-323.
Yuk, Y. M. (2019, December). Challenges in China’s Private higher education, a comparative study on Minban and Independent colleges. In Web of Proceedings, 4th International Conference on Education & Education Research, Liverpool, UK (pp. 9-12).
Zhang, W., & Zhu, C. (2018). Comparing learning outcomes of blended learning and traditional face-to-face learning of university students in ESL courses. International Journal on E-Learning, 17(2), 251-273.
Zhang, H., Baba, J. B., & Yuan, C. (2024). Comparative Study on the Implementation of Blended English Teaching in Private and Public Universities in China. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 13(4), 2008–2017.
Copyright: © 2024 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