ISSN: 2226-6348
Open access
The study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of blended learning towards students’ performance in Electrochemistry topic among Malaysian secondary school students. A quasi-experimental study was carried out at one of the secondary schools located in Hulu Langat District, Selangor, Malaysia. The respondents in this study were 62 students that comprises of 31 respondents in blended learning group and 31 respondents in traditional learning group. The research design in the current study employed a quasi-experimental with a nonrandomized control group with pre-test and post-test. The instrument used in this study was based on previous Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (Malaysia Education Certificate). The data was analyzed in inferential statistics which encompasses pair sample t-test and independent sample t-test. The findings of this study revealed that blended learning and traditional learning had improved students’ performance in Electrochemistry topic. However, there was a significant difference on the mean scores of the electrochemistry performance post-test between the blended learning group (M=75.5484, SD = 8.84247) and the traditional learning method group (M=47.0000, SD= 7.43416); (t (60) =13.759, p = 0.00) (p<0.05). The findings in this study revealed that blended learning is more effective than traditional learning method in order to improve students’ performance in Electrochemistry topic. The researcher suggested that blended learning should implemented to other subjects and the policy maker should adopt blended learning instruction in education curriculum.
Allsop, R. T., & George, N. H. (1982). Redox in Nuffield advanced chemistry. Education in Chemistry 19: 57-59.
Al-Qahtani, A. A. Y., & Higgins, S. E. (2013). Effects of traditional, blended and e-learning on students' achievement in higher education. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(3), 220-234.
Alsalhi, N. R., Eltahir, M. E., & Al-Qatawneh, S. S. (2019). The effect of blended learning on the achievement of ninth grade students in science and their attitudes towards its use. Heliyon, 5(9), e02424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e02424
Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., Sorensen, C. K., & Walker, D. (2014). Introduction to research in education (9th ed.). Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
Ashikin, I., & Osman, K. (2013). Kesan Frog VLE Secara Pembelajaran Kooperatif Terhadap Pencapaian, KBAT dan Minat Pelajar Bagi Subjek Kimia. Fakulti Pendidikan, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, 635–649.
Asparin, A. A., & Tan, D. A. (2018). Students’ Problem Solving Skills in Enhanced Gradual Release of Responsibility Instruction Model. Asian Academic Research Journal of Multidisciplinary, 5(3), 121-128.
Choshin, M., Ghaffari, A. (2017). An investigation of the impact of effective factors on the success of e-commerce in small-and medium-sized companies. Comput. Hum. Behav. 66, 67–74.
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Cooner, T. S. (2010). Creating opportunities for students in large cohorts to reflect in and on practice: Lessons learnt from a formative evaluation of students’ experiences of a technology-enhanced blended learning design. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(2), 271–286. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00933.x
Driscoll, M. (2002). Blended Learning: Let’s Get beyond the Hype. IBM Global Services. Retrieved from: http://www-07.ibm.com/services/pdf/blended_learning.pdf
Elmer, S. J., Carter, K. R., Armga, A. J., & Carter, J. R. (2016). Blended learning within an undergraduate exercise physiology laboratory. Advances in Physiology Education, 40(1), 64-69.
Finley, F. N., Stewart, J., & Yarroch, W. L. (1982). Teachers’ perceptions of important and difficult science content. Science Education, 66, 531-538.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730660404
Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. Internet and Higher Education, 7,95–105.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001.
Graham, C. R. (2006). Blended learning systems: definition, current trends, and future directions. In: Bonk, C.J., Graham, C.R. (Eds.), Handbook of Blended Learning: Global Perspectives Local Designs. Pfeiffer Publishing, SanFrancisco, CA, pp. 3–21.
Graham, C. R. (2013). Emerging practice and research in blended learning. In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of distance education, (3rd ed., pp. 333–350). New York: Routledge.
Harvey, S., Ve Chris, R. (2001). A White Paper: Achieving Success with Blended Learning. 21.01.2015. http://www.centra.com/ download/whitepapers/blendedlearning.pdf .
Hinampas, R. T., Murillo, C. R., Tan, D. A., & Layosa, R. U. (2018). Blended learning approach: Effect on students’ academic achievement and practical skills in science laboratories. International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research, 7(11), 63–69.
Hoic-Bozic, N., Mornar, V., & Boticki, I. (2009). A Blended Learning Approach to Course Design and Implementation. IEEE Transactions on Education, 52(1), 19–30. doi:10.1109/te.2007.914945
Karsli, F., & Çalik, M. (2012). Can freshman science student teachers’ alternative conceptions of ‘electrochemical cells’ be fully diminished? Asian Journal of Chemistry, 24(2): 485-491.
Khader, N. S. K. (2016). The Effectiveness of Blended Learning in Improving Students’ Achievement in Third Grade’s Science in Bani Kenana. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(35), 109–116. Retrieved from
http://libproxy.library.wmich.edu/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/1895979064?accountid=15099
Nizal, I., Shaharanee, M., & Jamil, J. M. (2016). Google classroom as a tool for active learning. AIP Conference Proceedings 1761, 020069 (2016); doi: 10.1063/1.4960909
Sanger, M. J., & Greenbowe, T. J. (1997). Common student misconceptions in electrochemistry: Galvanic, electrolytic, and concentration cells. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 34(4): 377-398.
Susan, P., Chris, S. (2015). Maximising Competency Education and Blended Learning. Incol Competency Works, New York.
Osguthorpe, R. T., & Graham, C. R. (2003). Blended learning environments: Definitions and directions. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education,4 (3), 227 – 233.
Taber, K. S. (1998). The sharing-out of nuclear attraction: Or "I can`t think about physics in chemistry". International Journal of Science Education, 20, 1001-1014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0950069980200807
Tan, Y. T., Loh, W. L., & Tan, O. T. (2007). Success Chemistry SPM. Shah Alam: Oxford Fajar Sdn. Bhd.Aziz, M. A. A., Talib, O., Tajularipin, Sulaiman, & Kamarudin, N. (2021). Effects of Blended Learning towards Students’ Performance in Electrochemistry Topic among Secondary School Students in Malaysia. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 10(2), 1-.
Thomas, J., Graham, C. (2019). Online teaching competencies in observational rubrics: What are institutions evaluating? Distance Educ. 40 (1), 114–132.
Whitelock, D., Jelfs, A. (2003). Editorial: journal of educational media special issue on blended learning. J. Educ. Media 28 (2-3), 99–100.
In-Text Citation: (Aziz et al., 2021)
To Cite this Article: Aziz, M. A. A., Talib, O., Tajularipin, Sulaiman, & Kamarudin, N. (2021). Effects of Blended Learning towards Students’ Performance in Electrochemistry Topic among Secondary School Students in Malaysia. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 10(2), 67-78.
Copyright: © 2021 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