*Netty Haiffaq Binte Zaini MATTAR, Aileen Wanli LAM, and Doreen TAN
Centre for English Language Communication (CELC), NUS
Netty Haiffaq Zaini Mattar, Lam, A. W. L., & Tan, D. (2024). Student wellbeing: Perception of support in blended learning environments [Paper presentation]. In Higher Education Conference in Singapore (HECS) 2024, 3 December, National University of Singapore. https://blog.nus.edu.sg/hecs/hecs2024-nmattar-et-al/
SUB-THEME
Opportunities from Wellbeing
KEYWORDS
Blended learning, system-level support, student perception, student wellbeing.
CATEGORY
Paper Presentation
EXTENDED ABSTRACT
Blended learning is a potentially transformative approach to education that can result in personalized learning (Kumar et al, 2021) and increased efficiency (Dwiyogo, 2020), thus maximising learning potential (Poon, 2013) through the blending of content and technology (Liu et al., 2024). Blended learning involves various combinations of traditional face-to-face learning with online technologies. This means that students need to toggle between synchronous and asynchronous lectures, materials, activities, and tasks which can include retrieving and viewing content throughout the semester (e.g. readings and videos), collaboration on activities online (e.g. peer review and collaborative writing), and participation in formative and summative assessments on various online platforms. These platforms range from learning management systems like Canvas and Blackboard, collaborative tools like Google Drive and Microsoft Teams, video conferencing tools like Zoom, as well as interactive tools like Slido and Kahoot. Because of the multiple platforms and learning modes involved, students can feel disorientated, overwhelmed, and anxious (Allen & Seaman, 2013), especially if the information and procedures to access online components of the course is unclear or if students need to use sophisticated applications (Vaughan, 2007). This has a negative impact on students’ mental and emotional wellbeing, leading to symptoms like “stress, neck impairment and back disability” (Agarwal & Agarwal, 2022) as students navigate the challenges of blended learning environments (Conwi et al., 2024). When students are unfamiliar with platforms and systems (Kadaer et al., 2022), have not been prepared for the programme (Willging & Johnson, 2009), or feel they “waste time on technical issues” (Sazdovska-Pigulovska, 2021), it can trigger stress, leading to negative impact. One implication is that increased student agency in blended environments must be accompanied by clear expectations and explicit guidance (O’Brien & Freund, 2018) such as instructions on the “primary presentation of course content” (Garrison et al., 2000, p. 90), clear protocols when communicating online, as well as high accessibility of materials.
According to scholars like Salmon (2003) and Moule (2006), clarity of expectations, explicit instruction and high accessibility all relate to initial, system-level support in higher education online learning environments. Support here includes facilitating students’ access to course notes, activities, materials, databases, or platforms, in complex blended learning environments (Salmon, 2003, p. 28; Moule, 2006, p. 377). It also includes clear expectations about how to proceed with, and complete, activities, as well as clear protocols for communication between students and instructors, and for how to obtain technical support. Support at this level aids learning, but is not central to the actual learning process (Moule, 2007, p. 42). However, as mentioned, system-level support is essential to mitigating the emotional and psychological difficulties in blended learning environments, and thus essential to student wellbeing (Lancaster, 2022, p. 48).
We are interested in how students, from a range of undergraduate and postgraduate courses at the National University of Singapore (NUS), perceive this system-level support in their courses. More specifically, we are interested in what aspects they perceive to be important.
We draw our findings from a survey conducted with students from twelve blended courses offered by the Centre for English Language and Communication (CELC), NUS. The quantitative survey items covered course design, delivery, student workload, student engagement, assessments, use of technology, training and support for students and communication and overfall perceptions of the course. Two open-ended questions were also included at the end of the survey, and a thematic analysis was carried out on the qualitative feedback. The questions were:
- What are the strengths and areas for improvement in the blended learning arrangement in my CELC course?
- Overall, how do you feel about being part of a blended learning environment as a student?
Based on the findings, this paper will share aspects of system-level support students perceive as important to bolster their well-being in blended learning environments. We propose that effective support mechanisms—such as thoughtful organisation of resources, streamlining of platforms, and frequent and clear communication—will positively impact the emotional wellbeing of students. Additionally, this paper provides practical recommendations educators can adopt to improve support structures.
REFERENCES
Agarwal, A., & Agarwal, D. (2022). Implication of online learning on the physical and mental well-being of students. International Journal of Research in Engineering and Innovation, 06(05), 366–369. https://doi.org/10.36037/IJREI.2022.6508
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2013). Changing Course: Ten Years of Tracking Online Education in the United States. Sloan Consortium (NJ1). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=eD541571
Conwi, C., Pinar, W., & Destura, M. (2024). Exploring mental wellbeing, distress and adjustment in a blended learning environment. Journal of Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 2(7), 146-157. https://doi.org/10.69569/jip.2024.0148
Dwiyogo, W. D. (2020). Effectiveness, efficiency and instruction appeal of blended learning model.
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, 87-105. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6
Lancaster, M. (2022). Blended learning: impacts on the student experience (pp. 46–56). Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.
Liu, Y., Chen, S., Feng, X., Bai, X., & Ma, Y. (2024). Supporting Students and Instructors in Blended Learning. In: Li, M., Han, X., Cheng, J. (eds) Handbook of Educational Reform Through Blended Learning. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-6269-3_5
Moule, P. (2006). E-learning for healthcare students: developing the communities of practice framework. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 54(3), 370–380.
Moule, P. (2007). Challenging the five-stage model for e-learning: a new approach. ALT-J, 15(1), 37–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687760601129588
O’Brien, M., & Freund, K. (2018). Lessons learned from introducing social media use in undergraduate economics research. International Journal of Education and Development using ICT, 14(1). https://www.learntech-lib.org/p/183552/
Poon, J. (2013). Blended learning: An institutional approach for enhancing students’ learning experiences. Journal of online learning and teaching, 9(2), 271.
Salmon, G. (2003). E-moderating (2nd ed.). Routledge Falmer.
Sazdovska-Pigulovska, M. (2021). Impact of online education on student emotional well-being. Educational Role of Language Journal, 2021-2, 6-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.36534/erlj.2021.02.01
Vaughan, N. (2007). Perspectives on blended learning in higher education. International Journal on E-Learning, 6(1), 81-94. https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/6310/
Willging, P. A., & Johnson, S. D. (2009). Factors that influence students’ decision to dropout of online courses. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 13(3), 115-127. http://dx.doi.org/10.24059/olj.v8i4.1814