LinkedIn

 آمار

تعداد نشریات20
تعداد شماره‌ها1,230
تعداد مقالات11,205
تعداد مشاهده مقاله78,023,591
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله103,588,263
SHELLY, SALMAH, IDRIS, IRFAN, MAPPAWARE, NASRUDDIN, RASYID, HAERANI, BUKHARI, AGUSSALIM, AFANDI, ICHLAS, AMALIA, ASTY. (1402). Evaluation of Blended Learning in Terms of the Perceptions of Medical Students: A Mixed Method Study. سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 12(1), 28-36. doi: 10.30476/jamp.2023.98956.1819
SALMAH SHELLY; IRFAN IDRIS; NASRUDDIN ANDI MAPPAWARE; HAERANI RASYID; AGUSSALIM BUKHARI; ICHLAS NANANG AFANDI; ASTY AMALIA. "Evaluation of Blended Learning in Terms of the Perceptions of Medical Students: A Mixed Method Study". سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 12, 1, 1402, 28-36. doi: 10.30476/jamp.2023.98956.1819
SHELLY, SALMAH, IDRIS, IRFAN, MAPPAWARE, NASRUDDIN, RASYID, HAERANI, BUKHARI, AGUSSALIM, AFANDI, ICHLAS, AMALIA, ASTY. (1402). 'Evaluation of Blended Learning in Terms of the Perceptions of Medical Students: A Mixed Method Study', سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 12(1), pp. 28-36. doi: 10.30476/jamp.2023.98956.1819
SHELLY, SALMAH, IDRIS, IRFAN, MAPPAWARE, NASRUDDIN, RASYID, HAERANI, BUKHARI, AGUSSALIM, AFANDI, ICHLAS, AMALIA, ASTY. Evaluation of Blended Learning in Terms of the Perceptions of Medical Students: A Mixed Method Study. سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 1402; 12(1): 28-36. doi: 10.30476/jamp.2023.98956.1819

Evaluation of Blended Learning in Terms of the Perceptions of Medical Students: A Mixed Method Study

Journal of Advances in Medical Education & Professionalism
دوره 12، شماره 1، فروردین 2024، صفحه 28-36    اصل مقاله (582.89 K)
نوع مقاله: Original Article
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.30476/jamp.2023.98956.1819
نویسندگان
SALMAH SHELLY* 1، 2؛ IRFAN IDRIS1، 3؛ NASRUDDIN ANDI MAPPAWARE1، 4؛ HAERANI RASYID1، 5، 6؛ AGUSSALIM BUKHARI1، 6؛ ICHLAS NANANG AFANDI7، 8؛ ASTY AMALIA1، 9
1Departement of Medical Education, Faculty of Medicine, Hasanuddin University, Makassar, Indonesia
2Departement of Histology, Faculty of Medicine, Hasanuddin University, Makassar, Indonesia
3Departement of Physiology, Faculty of Medicine, Hasanuddin University, Makassar, Indonesia
4Departement of Obstetrics and Ginecology, Faculty of Medicine, Hasanuddin University, Makassar, Indonesia
5Departement of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Hasanuddin University, Makassar, Indonesia
6Departement of Clinical Nutrition, Faculty of Medicine, Hasanuddin University, Makassar, Indonesia
71Departement of Medical Education, Faculty of Medicine, Hasanuddin University, Makassar, Indonesia
8Psychology Study Program, Faculty of Medicine, Hasanuddin University, Makassar, Indonesia
9Departement of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine, Hasanuddin University, Makassar, Indonesia
چکیده
Introduction: The ongoing 4.0 industrial evolution, characterized by the rise of digital technology, has had a massive impact on human lifestyles worldwide. Faculty members in medical school are
expected to respond to this industrial revolution by implementing teaching strategies, one of which is Blended learning as a suitable solution to overcome the limitations of space and time in the teaching process. For effective utilization of blended learning, it is important to conduct extensive studies on its implementation. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of implementing blended learning in the faculty of medicine in Hasanuddin University
from the students’ perspective.
Methods: This study used a sequential explanatory mixed method approach, combining quantitative and qualitative methods. The quantitative part involved 782 undergraduate medical students from the first, second, and third years. Data were collected through a questionnaire survey distributed among the students. The qualitative part of the research was conducted through focus group discussions involving 13 students based on the questionnaire scores,
representing both high and low scores. The results of the quantitative and qualitative research were collected and integrated.
Results: Based on the results, the majority of students agreed that blended learning provided many advantages to their learning (Mean±SD: 3.79±0.78). Also, they reported e-learning platform significantly contributed to their learning process (Mean±SD: 3.88±0.67). The workload of blended learning method was still considered quite heavy by students, and good time management was highly needed (Mean±SD: 3.45±0.84). As for qualitative part, some positive results were obtained; they reported that it increased motivation for learning, enhanced the efficiency of learning and gaining adaptability, while the negative opinions were the network error in e-learning, erratic
e-learning display, and video quality problem.
Conclusion: Most of the students expressed positive opinions about the advantages of blended learning; according to them, learning was more efficient and effective, it enhanced learning motivation, and it provided comprehensive accessible learning materials.

تازه های تحقیق
کلیدواژه‌ها
Active learning؛ Student؛ Perspective؛ Learning
سایر فایل های مرتبط با مقاله
مراجع
  1. Hussin AA. Education 4.0 made simple: Ideas for teaching. Int J Educ Lit Stud. 2018;6(3):92–8.
  2. Peterson TO. So you’re thinking of trying problem based learning?: Three critical success factors for implementation. J Manag Educ. 2004;28(5):630–47.
  3. Sukoco PC. Blended learning dalam Pembelajaran. USA: Allen Institute. 2017. pp. 339–46.
  4. Powell A, Rabbitt B, Kennedy K. iNACOL Blended Learning Teacher Competency Framework. USA: Int Assoc K-12 Online Learn. 2014. pp. 2-17.
  5. Stein J, Graham CR. Essentials for blended learning: A standards-based guide. UK: Routledge; 2020.
  6. Horn MB. K-12 online education is increasingly hybrid learning. Distance Learn. 2010;7(2):18.
  7. Lim DH, Morris ML. Learner and instructional factors influencing learning outcomes within a blended learning environment. J Educ Technol Soc. 2009;12(4):282–93.
  8. Han F, Ellis RA. Initial development and validation of the perceptions of the blended learning environment questionnaire. J Psychoeduc Assess. 2020;38(2):168–81.
  9. Taherdoost H. Validity and Reliability of the Research Instrument; How to Test the Validation of a Questionnaire/Survey in a Research. Int J Acad Res Manag. 2016;5:28–36.
  10. Stahl NA, King JR. Expanding approaches for research: Understanding and using trustworthiness in qualitative research. J Dev Educ. 2020;44(1):26–8.
  11. Jebraeily M, Pirnejad H, Feizi A, Niazkhani Z. Evaluation of blended medical education from lecturers’ and students’ viewpoint: a qualitative study in a developing country. BMC Med Educ. 2020;20(1):1–11.
  12. Rahman NAA, Hussein N, Aluwi AH. Satisfaction on blended learning in a public higher education institution: what factors matter? Procedia-Soc Behav Sci. 2015;211:768–75.
  13. Owston R, York D, Murtha S. Student perceptions and achievement in a university blended learning strategic initiative. Internet High Educ. 2013;18:38–46.
  14. Sari SP. Investigating the students’ perception toward blended learning method implemented in teaching english at seventh semester english students of unismuh Makassar. Makassar, Indonasia: Digital Library Universitas Muhammadiyah Makassar; 2020.
  15. Kokoç M. Flexibility in e-Learning: Modelling Its Relation to Behavioural Engagement and Academic Performance. Themes in eLearning. 2019;12:1-16.
  16. Müller C, Mildenberger T, Steingruber D. Learning effectiveness of a flexible learning study programme in a blended learning design: Why are some courses more effective than others? Int J Educ Technol High Educ. 2023;20(1):1–25.
  17. McCabe C, Francis RW. Effective instruction in blended learning environments. Learn Digit Age. 2020;20:1.
  18. Dziuban C, Graham CR, Moskal PD, Norberg A, Sicilia N. Blended learning: the new normal and emerging technologies. Int J Educ Technol High Educ. 2018;15:1–16.
  19. Zhang W, Zhu C. Review on blended learning: Identifying the key themes and categories. Int J Inf Educ Technol. 2017;7(9):673–8.
  20. Bi J, Javadi M, Izadpanah S. The comparison of the effect of two methods of face-to-face and E-learning education on learning, retention, and interest in English language course. Educ Inf Technol. 2023;28:1–26.
  21. Kenan T, Pislaru C, Othman A, Elzawi A. The social impact and cultural issues affecting the e-learning performance in Libyan higher education institutes. Int J Inf Technol Comput Sci. 2013;12(1):50–6.
  22. Husamah H. Pembelajaran bauran (Blended learning). Jakarta, Indonasia: Prestasi Pustakaraya; 2014.
  23. Spring KJ, Graham CR, Hadlock CA. The current landscape of international blended learning. Int J Technol Enhanc Learn. 2016;8(1):84–102.
  24. Broadbent J. Comparing online and blended learner’s self-regulated learning strategies and academic performance. Internet High Educ. 2017;33:24–32.
  25. Tan M, Hew K. Incorporating meaningful gamification in a blended learning research methods class: Examining student learning, engagement, and affective outcomes. Australas J Educ Technol. 2016;32(5):19-32.
  26. Balci E. Perceptions of blended learning in an EFL setting. UK: Cambridge University Press Teacher Research Programme; 2017.
  27. Eke HN. Modeling LIS students’ intention to adopt e-learning: a case from university of Nigeria, Nebraska. Nigeria, Nebraska: University of Nebraska; 2011.
آمار
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 994
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 489


سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی. قدرت گرفته از سیناوب