Vol. 17 (2023): CNU-JHE

Implementation of Blended Learning Modality:An Evaluation Based on ABCD Model

Edgermi Gingoyon
Sacred Heart School - Ateneo de Cebu

Published 23-06-2023


  • evaluation,
  • implementation,
  • learning modality


In the integration of both online and face-to-face interactions, blended learning has become a significant educational approach. To examine its implementation, this study uses a descriptive-evaluation mixed-methods research design (quantitative and qualitative) to evaluate the implementation of the Blended Learning Modality based on ABCD Model. Using primary and secondary sources of data, adopted tools to measure learners’ satisfaction and engagement levels, and interview questions to validate participants’ responses, this study thoroughly evaluated the participants, programs, effects, and impact. Results show that the implementation of the program was effective in its effect on the satisfaction and engagement levels and academic performance of students and its impact on parents. These findings indicate that effective implementation of blended learning is a factor in students' success. The researcher postulate recommendations to address a few gaps.


  1. Alvarez, Jr., A. (2020). Learning from the problems and challenges in
  2. blended learning: Basis for faculty development and program enhancement. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 15(2), 112-132. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4292631
  3. Akyol, Z., & Garrison, D. R. (2011). Understanding cognitive presence
  4. in an online and blended community of inquiry: Assessing outcomes and processes for deep approaches to learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(2), 233–250. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.01029.x
  5. Basar, Z. M., Mansor, A. N., Jamaludin, K. A., & Alias, B. S. (2021). The effectiveness and challenges of online learning for secondary school students – A case study. Asian Journal of University Education (AJUE), 17(3). https://doi.org/10.24191/ajue.v17i3.14514
  6. Bautista, J. (2022, November 9). Most private schools sticking to blended learning. Inquirer.
  7. Benson, V., Anderson, D., & Ooms, A. (2011). Educators’
  8. perceptions, attitudes and practices: Blended learning in business and management education.Research in Learning Technology, 19(2), 143-154. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/21567069.2011.586676
  9. Blended Learning to Continue in Private Schools. (2021, October). Retrieved from bria.com: https://www.bria.com.ph/articles/blended-learning-to-continue-in-private-schools/
  10. Chanda, P. (2021, July 21). How blended teaching can enable true
  11. blended learning. Teaching Times. https://www.teachingtimes.com/how-to-enable-true-blended-
  12. learning/
  13. Christenson, S. L., Reschly, A. L., & Wylie, C. (Eds.).
  14. (2012). Handbook of research on student engagement. Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7
  15. Cuesta Medina, L. (2018). Blended learning: Deficits and prospects in
  16. higher education. Australasian Journal of Educational
  17. Technology, 34(1). https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3100
  18. Dabu, F. (2022, July 15). University of the Philippines Shaping minds that shape the nation. Retrieved from up.edu.ph: https://up.edu.ph/up-adapts-blended-learning-for-ay-2022-2023/
  19. Dearing, E., Kreider, H., Simpkins, S., & Weiss, H. B. (2005). Family
  20. involvement in school and low-income children's literacy: Longitudinal associations between and within families. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(4), 690–704.
  21. Dryden, M., Webster, W. J., & Fraser, B. J. (2010). Rethinking the
  22. effects of classroom environments on student learning in a large school system.1-16.
  23. Duygu, D. C., Alkiş, N., & Ozkan-Yildirim, S. (2018). A structural
  24. model for students’ adoption of Learning Management Systems: An empirical investigation in the higher education context. Educational Technology and Society, 21(2), 13–27.
  25. eLearning. (2021, June 1). Retrieved from mintbook.com: https://mintbook.com/blog/benefits-of-blended-learning/#Enable_and_Encourage_Students_to_Collaborate
  26. Dziuban, C., Graham, C.R., Moskal, P.D. et al. (2018). Blended
  27. learning: the new normal and emerging technologies. Int J Educ Technol High Educ (15) 3 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0087-5
  28. Fakhir, Z. & Ibrahim, M. (2018). The effect of blended learning on
  29. private school students’ achievement in English and their attitudes towards it. English Language and Literature Studies, 8(2), 39-51. Retrieved November 20, 2018 from http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ells/article/view/75382
  30. Gounopoulos, E., Sotirios, K., Valsamidis, S., & Kaznidis, I. (2023). Blended learning evaluation in higher education courses. EBEEC Conference Proceedings. Dubai, UAE: KnE Publishing.
  31. Harding, A., Kaczynski, D., & Wood, L. (2005). Evaluation of blended learning: analysis of qualitative data. UniServe Science Blended Learning Symposium Proceedings.
  32. Hilliard, A. T. (2015). Global blended learning practices for teaching and learning, leadership and professional development. Journal of International Education Research - Third Quarter .
  33. Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. Educause Review, 27. Retrieved from https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/3/the-difference-between-emergency-remote-teaching-and-online-learning
  34. Kassner, L. (2013). Mix it up with blended learning in K-12 schools. Metropolitan Education Research Consortium (p. 107). Virginia Commonwealth University.
  35. Kenney, J., & Newcombe, E. (2011). Adopting a blended learning
  36. approach: Challenges, encountered and lessons learned in an
  37. action research study. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 15(1), 45–57.
  38. Khan, F.N., Begum, M., & Imad, M. (2019). Relationship between
  39. students’ home environment and their academic achievement at secondary school level. Pakistan Journal of Distance and Online Learning, 5(2), 223-234.
  40. Khan, J., & Iqbal, J. (2016). Relationship between Student satisfaction and Academic Achievement in Distance Education: a Case Study of AIOU Islamabad. FWU Journal of Social Sciences, 137-145.
  41. Kintu, M.J., Zhu, C. & Kagambe, E. Blended learning effectiveness:
  42. the relationship between student characteristics, design
  43. features and outcomes. Int J Educ Technol High Educ 14, 7 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0043-4
  44. Kuzminykh, I., Ghita, B., & Xiao, H. (2021). The Relationship Between Student Engagement and Academic Performance in Online Education. ICSET 2021: 2021 5th International Conference on E-Society, E-Education and E-Technology. New York: Machinery, New York, United States.
  45. Lebbe, G. (2017). How to design an effective blended learning environment.
  46. Wooclap. https://www.wooclap.com/en/blog/how-to-design-an-effective-blended-learning-environment/
  47. Liu, M. (2013). Blended Learning in a University EFL Writing Course: Description and Evaluation. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 301 - 309.
  48. Ma, L., & Lee, C. (2021). Evaluating the effectiveness of blended learning using the ARCS model. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning.
  49. Maguire, M., & Delahunt , B. (2017). Doing a Thematic Analysis: A Practical, Step-by-Step Guide for Learning and Teaching Scholars. All Ireland Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (AISHEE-J), 3351-33514.
  50. Martin, F., Budhrani, K., & Wang, C. (2017). Examining students' online interaction, sense of community, and satisfaction in online learning. International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education, 13(4), 66-77.
  51. McCarthy, J. (2018, September 24). edutopia. Retrieved from edutopia.org: https://www.edutopia.org/article/tech-integration-blended-learning/
  52. Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2013).
  53. Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A
  54. meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. US
  55. Department of Education.
  56. Ochave, J. (2003). Towards the Development of a Blueprint for a
  57. Stakeholder-Friendly Evaluation Model for Training and Education Programmes. Journal of Southeast Asian Education. Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 25-44.
  58. Ozkan, S. (2008). Evaluating learning management systems: Hexagonal e-learning assessment model (HELAM). European and Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems. Dubai: Research Gate.
  59. Ozkan, S. and Koseler, R. (2009). "Multi-dimensional evaluation of E-
  60. learning systems in the higher education context: An empirical investigation of a computer literacy course," 39th IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, San Antonio, TX, USA, 2009, pp. 1-6, doi: 10.1109/FIE.2009.5350590.
  61. Poirier, M., Law, J. &, Veispak, A. (2019). A Spotlight on lack of
  62. evidence supporting the integration of blended learning in K-12
  63. education: A systematic review. International Journal of Mobile
  64. and Blended Learning (IJMBL), 11(4), 1-14. http://doi.org/10.4018/IJMBL.2019100101
  65. Qasim, M., Saleem, A. & Hafeez, M. (2022). Parental Involvement in
  66. Online Learning and Academic Achievements of their Children under COVID-19 Conditions. Pakistan Social Sciences Review. Vol 5., No. 4 (1-14).
  67. Rajabalee, Y.B., Santally, M.I. (2021). Learner satisfaction,
  68. engagement and performances in an online module: Implications for institutional e-learning policy. Educ Inf Technol 26, 2623–2656 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10375-1
  69. Ribeiro, L. M., Cunha, R. S., Silva, M. C. A. e, Carvalho, M., & Vital,
  70. M. L. (2021). Parental Involvement during Pandemic Times: Challenges and Opportunities. Education Sciences, 11(6), 302. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/educsci11060302
  71. Santiago Jr., C. S., Ulanday, M. L. P., Centeno, Z. J. R., Bayla, M. C.
  72. D., & Callanta, J. S. (2021). Flexible learning adaptabilities in the new normal: E-learning resources, digital meeting platforms, online learning systems and learning engagement. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 16(2), 38-56. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5762474
  73. Shraim, K., & Khlaif, Z. N. (2010). An e-learning approach to
  74. secondary education in Palestine: opportunities and
  75. challenges. Information Technology for Development, 16(3), 159–173.
  76. Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research
  77. Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory (2nd edition). Sage Publications: London. Retrieved from https://www.socresonline.org.uk/4/2/strauss.html
  78. Sukor, R., Ayub, A., Rashid, N., & Halim, F. (2021). Relationship Between Students’ Engagement with Academic Performance Among Non-Food Science Students Enrolled in Food Science Course. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 638-648.
  79. Terada, Y. (2018, March 9). edutopia. Retrieved from edutopia.org: https://www.edutopia.org/article/research-tested-benefits-breaks/
  80. Tong, D., Uyen, B. & Ngan, L. (2022). The effectiveness of blended
  81. learning on students' academic achievement, self-study skills and learning attitudes: A quasi-experiment study in teaching the conventions for coordinates in the plane. Retrieved from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405844022039457
  82. Trowler, V. (2010). Student engagement literature review. The Higher
  83. Education Academy, 11, 1–15. Retrieved from http://www.lancaster.ac.uk/staff/trowler/ StudentEngagementLiteratureReview.pdf
  84. UNESCO. (2021). Blended learning: How to incorporate online and
  85. traditional methods. Retrieved from https://en.unesco.org/news/blended-learning-how-incorporate-online-and-traditional-methods
  86. Uz, R. & Uzun, A. (2018). The influence of blended learning
  87. environment on self-regulated and
  88. self-directed learning skills of learners. European Journal of Educational Research 7(4): 877-886. http://www.eu-jer.com/
  89. Vaughan, N. & Garrison, D. R. (2013). A blended faculty community
  90. of inquiry: Linking leadership, course Redesign, and
  91. Evaluation. Canadian Journal of University Continuing
  92. Education 32(2):67-92. https://doi:10.21225/D5XK57
  93. Vaughan, N., Reali, A., Stenbom, S., Van Vuuren, M.J. & MacDonald,
  94. D. (2017). Blended learning from design to evaluation: International case studies of evidence-based practice. Online Learning, 21(3), 103-114. doi: 10.24059/olj.v21i3.1252
  95. Vaughan, N., & Garrison, D. (2005). Creating cognitive presence in a
  96. blended faculty development community. The Internet and
  97. Higher Education, 8 (1), 112.doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.11.001
  98. Vandermaas-Peeler, M., Maguire, M., & Mahatmya, D. (2020). Family
  99. engagement during a pandemic: Early lessons from the field. Early Childhood Education Journal, 48(6), 775-783.
  100. Voogt, J., Knezek, G., Christensen, R. (2018). Second handbook of
  101. information technology in primary and secondary education.
  102. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71054-9