Peer Reviewed Journal

SMCC Higher Education Research Journal

ISSN Print: 2449-4402 · ISSN online: 2467-6322
Volume 3 · January 2017

Proposed Blended Learning Model for Don Mariano Marcos

Memorial State University - South La Union Campus
(DMMMSU-SLUC)

AGUSTIN R. VERAS, JR.

http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3598-8533
averasjr@yahoo.com
DMMMSU-SLUC, San Antonio,
Agoo, La Union, Philippines

ABSTRACT

Blended Learning (BL) combines face-to-face and on-line learning. The study showed the contributions of the developed
content management system using DRUPAL in a BL approach at DMMMSU-SLUC specifically at the College of Computer
Science (CCS), Agoo, La Union, Philippines. Then, a proposed model was developed as a guideline for the implementation
of BL for campuses who wish to experiment with BL approach. The extent of readiness for the University, Faculty and
Students was sought. Professional Ethics in IT, an undergraduate course was delivered as BL uploaded to a Webhost. The
respondents of the study classified as the control group and the experimental group. A questionnaire was adopted and used.
Frequency and mean were used to interpret data. Results showed that the institution is not ready for BL approach. Faculty
members and students are ready for blended learning approach. The results of the final grades of the Experimental and
Control groups using the mean grade is higher than that of the control groups indicating that learning took place. Findings
showed that the experiment was effective as indicated by a higher mean of the experimental group. The institution needs
attention on the implementation of BL. The University must adopt the Blended learning approach.

KEYWORDS

Blended learning, content management system, Agoo, La Union, Philippines.

INTRODUCTION

Due to a vast number of emerging technologies, student’s eagerness demands its inclusion in the teaching and learning
strategies of colleges or institutes. It has to be an integral part of the current curriculum of the school system. Blended
Learning (BL) is gaining acceptance and being adopted at college campuses throughout the US (Bonk & Graham, 2005; Allen
& Seaman, 2004), and it has also become an emerging strategy in the Philippine Education System (Refre, 2012; Arimbuyutan,
2007).
With the modernization of the educational system, the researcher saw this as a concern of DMMMSU-SLUC, particularly
College of Computer Science. Thus, the campus and the CCS joined efforts to fulfill the directives to provide students with
knowledge and skills they need. Computer courses in the University are of great importance for nation’s development.
Technology has indeed changed learning strategies. It has made the classroom setting as a thing of the past. It has also
changed the mode of instruction the students wanted. Educators should, therefore, equip students with lifelong learning skills
that they need to thrive in the digital age. They should be able to create learning environments that foster flexible and authentic
learning, which is essential if they are to succeed in this rapidly changing world (Pascual, 2012).
In the pre-technology education context, the teacher is the source, the educational material is the message, and the student
is the recipient. Regarding the delivery medium, the educator can deliver the message via the “chalk-and-talk” method and
overhead projector (OHP) transparencies (Damodharan, 2012). It became a popular technique, which has utilized for decades
as an educational strategy in all institutions of learning.

1
SMCC Higher Education Research Journal
Karwar (2014), explained that in education process innovative teaching learning process will get the effective change in a
student. Education motivate student to do by Confucius;

"I hear and I forget. I see, and I believe. I do, and I understand".

Traditional classroom delivery, however, has experienced a complete overhaul with the advent of Web 2.0 techniques for
delivering course material. The Socratic method of teaching can now be effectively accomplished in an online discussion
forum, a synchronous chat session, virtual environments, or in a wiki format. All of these innovative technologies have
become part of an instructor’s teaching toolkit, and his or her arsenal for transforming course delivery. This attempt to
combine all of the best elements of online and on-ground instruction into a “super-hybrid” of sorts, one that delivers a rich
skill set and a valuable educational experience to students is called blended teaching (Gilbert, et al., 2005).
The three most commonly mentioned definitions of Blended Learning are documented by Graham, Allen, and Ure (2003).
It is the process of (1) combining instructional modalities (or delivery media) (Bersin & Associates, 2003; Orey, 2002a, 2002b;
Singh & Reed, 2001; Thomson, 2002), or (2) combining instructional methods (Driscoll, 2002), or (3) combining online and
face-to-face instruction (Rooney, 2003; Sands, 2002; Ward & LaBranche, 2003; Young, 2002).

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

This study intends to propose a Blended Learning Program for Don Mariano Marcos Memorial State University – South
La Union Campus (DMMMSU-SLUC). Specifically, it sought answers to the following objectives: (1) To determine the extent
of readiness of the University, faculty, and students; (2) to determine the extent of effectiveness of the blended learning
approach; (3) and to propose a program for the blended learning approach for DMMMSU-SLUC.

METHODOLOGY

Two groups of the third year BS Computer Science students served as the subjects of the study. The researcher randomly
identified the section to be assigned to the experimental treatment through the flipping of a coin. Based on the results of the
flipping of a coin, BSCS III Section A was assigned to the experimental group while the BSCS III Section B to the controlled
group.
Moreover, face-to-face (F2F) interaction was also required in the experimental group. During this session, concerns,
queries or problems regarding the lessons were tackled. It was also during this time that examinations were conducted. The
researcher only conducted exams/quizzes during F2F sessions for avoiding security in the reliability of exam results. On the
other hand, students assigned to the controlled group underwent class discussions on lecture rooms.

Research Design
The study used the Pretest-Posttest Experimental Group Design or Posttest-Only Control Group Design. It involves the
following steps: (1) random assignment of subjects to experimental and controlled groups. (2) Administration of the treatment
to the experimental group but not in the control group, and (3) administration of a posttest to both groups (Borg and Gal,
1979).

To illustrate:
R EG X1 O1

R CG O2

Where:
R – Random assignment to separate treatment groups
O1 – Experimental posttest
O2 – Control posttest
X1 – experimental treatment
EG – Experimental Group
CG – Control Group

2
 Peer Reviewed Journal
Research Instruments
The researcher used a teacher-made test consisting of items that were item-analyzed to ensure the validity and reliability
of the instrument. The test was used as posttest for the study.
The result of the reliability of the test using the Pearson r formula was r=0.9351. Based on the interpretation of the index
of difficulty and index of discrimination, 20 items were “discarded,” 15 were “accepted items,” 12 items “may need revisions,”
and 8 items “needs revisions.” If the total accepted items (“accepted,” “may need revisions,” and “needs revisions”) has at
least 50% from the overall test items, then the teacher-made test is the acceptable instrument, (Padua and Santos, 1997).
To determine the reliability of the test, the test-retest method was employed. Index of discrimination and level of difficulty,
the coefficient of reliability was computed and some items were deleted, revised and accepted.
Items that have discarded may be deleted or revised. Items that “needs revision” may also be revised or leave as is. The
LMS-based material was validated by five computer experts using a questionnaire. The questionnaire was based on the content
validation of Vasay's (2006) instrument.

Data Analysis
Specific problem number one intends to determine the extent of readiness of the University, the Faculty and the students
for blended learning approach. The researcher used the weighted mean, t-test for independent samples and Pearson-r
correlation to interpret results.

The proponent adopted questionnaires to determine the readiness of the University, the Faculty and the students for
blended learning. To determine the readiness of the university, the researcher adopted the questionnaire from Leterbach, et
al. and Lajuar, et al.
In the same manner, the questionnaire for the faculty readiness was adopted from McQuiggan, Youville Public Schools
and Learning with Technology. Student readiness questionnaire was also adopted from University of Minnesota Technology
Survey 2011.
To establish the results of the readiness of the students, faculty members and institution to blended learning, a
questionnaire was used with its point scores and descriptive ratings using its scale as illustrated below:

Point Mean Range Qualitative Description

5 4.20 – 5.00 Very Much Sufficient/ Very Much Extent
4 3.40 – 4.19 Sufficient / Great Extent
3 2.60 – 3.39 Neutral/ Moderately Extent
2 1.80 – 2.59 Insufficient/ Little Extent
1 1.00 – 1.79 Very Insufficient/ Least Extent

Point Mean Range Qualitative Description

5 4.20 – 5.00 Excellent/ Always
4 3.40 – 4.19 Very Good/Almost Always
3 2.60 – 3.39 Good/Occasionally
2 1.80 – 2.59 Acceptable/Fairly/Rarely
1 1.00 – 1.79 Poor/Not at All

Point Mean Range Qualitative Description

4 3.25 – 4.00 Very Much
3 2.50 – 3.24 Much
2 1.75 – 2.49 Little
1 1.00 – 1.74 Very Little

Point Mean Range Qualitative Description

5 4.20 – 5.00 Very Useful/Very Much Prefer
4 3.40 – 4.19 Moderately Useful / Prefer
3 2.60 – 3.39 Slightly Useful/ Neutral
2 1.80 – 2.59 Somewhat Useful/ Prefer
1 1.00 – 1.79 Not at all useful/ Not Prefer
3
SMCC Higher Education Research Journal

Research problem number two sought to determine the effectiveness of blended learning approach. It first focused on
the validity of the instruments to be used and content validity of the developed content management system using DRUPAL.
Its validity was focused on the rating of five instructors/administrators and students using the scale as illustrated below:

Point Mean Range Qualitative Description

4 3.25 – 4.00 Very Much
3 2.50 – 3.24 Much
2 1.75 – 2.49 Little
1 1.00 – 1.74 Very Little
The level of performance of the experimental and control group was determined using the results of the posttest
administered to the respondents. The result of the posttest was determined using the t-test set at 0.05 level of significance.
In problem number three, the researcher attempted to propose a model for the blended learning approach for DMMMSU-
SLUC.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Students’ Readiness
The results indicate, in general, that the use of blended learning in their course/ subject is plausible. The results provided
an overall picture about students’ competitiveness in the use of technology in learning, their perceptions about the use of
technology in blended learning, their self-motivation, and study habits. It can, therefore, be concluded that students are ready
for a blended approach to learning.
To enable learners to become self-motivated, self-reliant and self-managing (Johnston et al., 2005) as cited by Khitam, et
al., it should be emphasized here on the implementation process mainly at the initial stage. There is a need to initiate awareness
among the educationists and students to change their attitudes and bring their attention to the potential of these models to
improve the learning process.

Faculty Readiness
Most educators use a variety of tools including video, e-mail, desktop conferencing, online programs such as WebCT and
Blackboard, as well as video conferencing to teach. Thus, it is no longer acceptable for educators to be technology illiterate.
Because as computer and associated technologies continue to evolve, teachers should pursue strive for excellence in their
work. (Turner, 2005). In general, faculty members are ready for blended learning approach.

Institutional Readiness
Based on the results, it was found out that the campus has insufficient facilities to support blended learning as evidenced
by a 2.5 category mean. The institution is not ready for blended learning approach. Based on the responses, it can be seen
that the campus has the little extent to support blended learning course. It may be attributed to the fact that the campus, so
far, does not have any experience in online-related courses. It may also be attributed to the insufficient resources for its
implementation and sustainability. On the positive side, administrators believe that using technology in learning improves
instruction. There is a provision for the exploration of new ways of delivering the lessons through innovative methods.
Sharpe et al (2006), reviewed existing research and practices on blended learning undertaken by Oxford Center for Staff
and Learning Development at Oxford Brookes University for the Higher Education Academy. All seven institutions visited
described current plans for initiating institutional monitoring and evaluation strategies to assess their students’ experiences.
However, their findings at all institutional level practices were problematic. This was due to the pressure to implement rather
than evaluate, the low status of pedagogic research, and poorly defined measures of institutional success in embedding blended
e-learning. Nonetheless, all institutions welcomed the opportunity to share approaches both through this review and the
Academy’s Benchmarking e-Learning project.

Effectiveness of the Blended Learning Approach

The experimental group mean grade is higher than the controlled groups. This situation indicates that they have learned
more.
The results shown in Table 2, further strengthen the effects of the BL with a computed F value of 0.014 at 0.05 level of
significance. The results indicate that the Final grades of the students in the experimental group are significantly higher than
the mean final grades of the control group. This implies that the BL approach is effective compared to the traditional
approach.

4
 Peer Reviewed Journal

Table 1. Results of the Analysis of the Final Grades of Experimental and Control Groups using the mean.
GROUP STATISTICS
1.1.4. STD. 1.1.5. STD.
1.1.1. GROUP 1.1.2. N 1.1.3. MEAN
DEVIATION ERROR MEAN
Experimental 36 85.17 3.325 .554
Grades
Control 39 83.41 3.118 .499

The study supports Robles’ (2011) conclusion that blended learning helps significantly in improving the students’
performance; hence, students’ performance increases. The findings also support Ebardo’s (2012) research which he conducted
at Jose Rizal University. In his study, he concluded that knowledge acquisition skills of the students improved through the
intervention of LMS.
Moreover, Rodriguez (2010) confirmed in his research that there was a significant difference in the mean achievements of
the two different respondents or groups in all areas under consideration in favor of the blended learning strategy. In like
manner Rolluqui (2011) adopted the use of Blended E-Learning Management system and found out that the systems
evaluation showed a very satisfactory rating to Technological University of the Philippines.
Al-Saai, et al. (2011) concluded in their research that the attitudes of online students improved compared to the students
in the face-to-face teaching approach. Such a result might be due to the interaction of the students in this group with the e-
learning environment which affected their attitudes toward the E-learning environment. The e-learning setting was associate
degree interactive learning setting that created a high degree of interaction between students, students and course content,
and students and teacher. It seems that this type of environment created a better chance for students and instructor
involvement which provide the social context needed for learning in its relation to the emotional domain of learning

Proposed Model for Blended Learning Approach for DMMMSU

The next table presents the different phases on how to implement the BL. It is important to emphasize that a successful
blended learning instructional implementation is correlated with several factors. Success is highly dependent upon an
instructions ability to support the blended instructional model and existence of a high-quality, well-designed (and supported)
faculty development plan. (Wallace and Young, 2009).

Table 2. Implementation of Blended Learning Approach for DMMMSU.

Phase Objectives Activities Output
Phase 1. To determine if the institution, Prepare/adopt a questionnaire to Questionnaire on the
Preparation faculty and students are ready for determine the readiness of the readiness of the
blended learning approach institution, faculty and students. institution, faculty and
students.
To determine if the curriculum is Revised curriculum in order to align Revised curriculum
geared towards the adoption of BL courses to BL approach (if
necessary)
To create a college strategic plan to Develop a strategic plan to allocate A developed strategic
support the blended learning funds for infrastructures in ICT plan to allocate funds
program (construction of lab rooms, for ICT infrastructures
hardware and software needed for
BL, networking devices, etc.)
To train students on how to use the Conduct a training/ Training/
CMS. Orientation on how to manipulate Orientation during the
the CMS in this way, students will be first two meetings.
comfortable to use the CMS
maximizing all its features. Solicit Suggestions or
suggestions on how to implement recommendations on
BL how to implement BL.
To train faculty members in CMS Prepare a training session or conduct Faculty Development
or LMS of their choice. an in-house training in using CMS or plan which includes
LMS. Or send faculty members to be seminars or training of
trained using CMS or LMS.
5
SMCC Higher Education Research Journal
faculty members in
CMS or LMS.
To allocate budget for the Administrators may submit Build sponsorship.
implementation of BL proposals to private/LGU’s for
sponsorships. Linked or tie-up with
other universities who are
implementing BL.
Phase 2 To train faculty members to Faculty members should be able to Modules, CMS/LMS
Implementation develop effective learning develop an effective CMS combining
materials/modules. features like feedback option,
students and teachers blog, video
conferencing, self-paced learning,
chats, assessment techniques,
assignments, etc.
To be able to discuss copyright Brief students on copyright issues. Briefing on copyright
issues. issues
To Plan and schedule F2F Inform students schedule for a F2F Schedule a F2F
meetings meeting. Discuss issues, concerns, meeting
problems encountered and
incorporate in succeeding online List of
meetings. recommendation,
suggestions, problems
that needs immediate
solutions.
To be able to build community List down email addresses of each Final list of students
student, send their account name and who are enrolled in BL
password through their email approach.
address. Address issues like unable to
receive account name and
passwords, wrong email address and
unsent students account.
To be able to conduct an online Equip a laboratory room where Laboratory rooms with
session in a laboratory room. online sessions will be conducted. internet access
This include setting up an internet
access and a network desktop. Wifi zone

Or provide an internet access in the

college to let students access CMS
using wifi.
To monitor the implementation of Administrators will monitor the Infrastructures
the BL mode. implementation of the BL course by
assessing the operation capability of
the college/unit in terms of
infrastructure and support.

Administrators will support the Approved budget

implementation of BL by studying sustainability
budget requirements of the college
or unit and the increase number of
enrolment.

Administrators may recommend for

the approval of the budget allocation
in terms of BL requirements to the
university level.
6
 Peer Reviewed Journal
Phase 3 To conduct an evaluation Faculty members will conduct an Problems encountered,
Evaluation assessment among students in interview or prepare questionnaire to issues, concerns and
terms of satisfaction. determine the satisfaction of the good point of students
students who underwent BL who took BL
approach

To conduct an evaluation among Float questionnaires to Faculty feedbacks

faculty members in terms of level members to determine their level of
of satisfaction in BL satisfaction in conducting BL
approach
To provide administrators analysis Prepare a chart showing the benefits Cost effectiveness
in terms of cost in implementing of BL in terms of its cost chart
BL. effectiveness

To ensure sustainability in the Prepare enrolment trends. Enrolment chart

implementation of BL
Show results of the effectiveness in Results of
terms of learning. effectiveness

CONCLUSIONS

The institution is not ready for blended learning approach. The institution needs attention as to the implementation of
BL. Due to many requirements needed to implement BL, the institution is not ready for its implementation. But the willingness
of the administrators to comply with the requirements of technology, infrastructure and student support in implementing BL
plus their belief that technology is indeed a component of learning helps the researcher developed a model for DMMMSU-
SLUC.
Faculty members are also ready with regards to shifting their teaching approaches to blended methods. Most of them do
not have any experience in online learning or online teaching, however; they are willing to attend training and programs related
to online or blended learning.
As to the readiness of students to BL approach, results show that students are ready for BL approach. Students willing to
use utilize blended method because of various technology familiarities. Though little worries are seeming due to financial fears
as students are unable to wage rents from internet cafes because of the lack of internet connection in the school. Learning is
also manifested in the experimental group because of the major difference in their low grade equated to control group.
The proposed model developed by the researcher has three major components. These components affect the
implementation of blended learning approach at DMMMSU-SLUC which includes the students, faculty and the institution
(Administration). These are the key players that make its implementation successful. The willingness to migrate from a brick
and mortar session to a blended mode solely depends on the support and unified interaction among these components. It is
within this purview that this model was developed.
The model addressed issues like the need to determine if the students, faculty and the institution are ready for a blended
learning approach. It defines the roles of these components in the preparation, implementation and evaluation stage. Finally,
the three components should be unified to support the implementation of BL to be successful.

LITERATURE CITED

Al-Saai, A., Al-Kaabi, A., Al-Muftah, S.,(2011), Effect of a Blended e-Learning Environment on Students' Achievement and Attitudes
toward Using E-Learning in Teaching and Learning at the University Level, Qatar University
Allen, Belinda, A model for transformation: A transdisciplinary approach to disseminating good practice in
blended learning in a science faculty, 2010.
Allen, I. E. & Seaman, J. (2005). Growing by degrees: Online education in the United States, 2005. Needham, MA:
Sloan- Consortium.
Allen, E., & Seaman, J. (2003).Sizing the opportunity: The quality and extent of online education in the United States, 2002 and
2003.Retrieved Jan 7, 2013 from http://www.sloanc.org/resources/sizing_opportunity.pdf
Arimbuyutan, Reynato C, Et al (2007), A Study on e-Learning for Philippines; International Journal of
Multimedia and Ubiquitous Engineering Vol. 2, No. 4, October, 2007; retrieved April 21, 2012 at
http://www.sersc.org/journals/IJMUE/vol2_no4_2007/5.pdf
Bersin & Associates. (2003). Blended learning: What works? An industry study of the strategy, implementation, and impact of
blended learning. Oakland, CA: Bersin & Associates.
7
SMCC Higher Education Research Journal
Bersin, J. Blended Learning Handbook. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2004
Bonk, C. & Graham, C. (2005). Handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs. San Francisco, CA:
Pfeiffer Publishing.
Damodharan, V. Rengarajan.V, Innovative Methods of Teaching AICWA, retrieved May 3, 2012 at
http://math.arizona.edu/~atp- mena/conference/proceedings/Damodharan_Innovative_Methods.p
df
Driscoll, M. (2002, March 1). Blended learning: Let’s get beyond the hype. e- learning.Retrieved April 28, 2012, from
http://www.ltimagazine.com/ltimagazine/article/articleDetai l.jsp?id=11755.
Ebardo, Ryan A, Valderama, Arlene Mae C., The Effect of Web- Based Learning Management System on
Knowledge Acquisition of Information Technology Students at Jose Rizal University, retrieved on May 1,
2012 at http://www.ijcim.th.org/SpecialEditions/v17nSP3/09_Full_Rya n%20A.%20Ebardo .pdf
Gilbert, J., MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching Vol. 7, No. 2, June 2011
Gilbert, L, Wang, C. and Sim, Y., “An e-Learning Systems Engineering Methodology”, Proceedings of the Fifth IEEE
International Conference on Advances Learning Technologies (ICALT ‘05), ISBN 0-7695-2338-2 , pp. 150– 154.
2005
Johnson, J., Killion, J., Oomen, J.(2005). Student satisfaction in the Virtual Classroom. The Internet Journal of Allied Health Sciences
and Practice.
Orey, M. (2002a). Definition of blended learning. University of Georgia. Retrieved April 30, 2012, from
http://www.arches.uga.edu/~mikeorey/blendedLearning.
Orey, M. (2002b). One year of online blended learning: Lessons learned. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the
Eastern Educational Research Association, Sarasota, FL.
Pascual, ALFREDO E., President University of the Philippines System, Message, 1st International Conference
on Distance e-Learning Conference, ICODEL, April 2012.
Refre, Antonio, E., An Innovative Strategy in Establishing Online Education in the Philippines’ Higher-
Education- Institutions (HEIs). Retrieved May 2, 2012 at http://elearning.ph/web/userfiles/refrepaper.pdf
Rodriuez, Marissa A., Anicete, Raymond Charles R., Students’ Views of a Mixed Hybrid Ecology Course,
MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2010, retrieved on
May 1, 2012 at http://jolt.merlot.org/vol6no4/rodriguez_1210.htm
Rooney, J. E. (2003). Blending learning opportunities to enhance educational programming and meetings.
Association Management..
Sharpe. R., Benfield, G., Roberts, G., Francis, R.,The undergraduate experience of blended e-learning: a Review of UK literature and
practice, Higher Education Academy – October 2006
Singh, H., & Reed, C. (2001). A white paper: Achieving success with blended learning. Centra Software. Retrieved May 1,
2012,from http://www.centra.com/download/whitepapers/blendedlearning. pdf.
Singh, H., Building Effective Blended Learning Programs., Issue of Educational Technology Vol. 43, No. 6., pages
51-54, download at http://jw1.nwnu.edu.cn/jpkc/jcxy/JXSJ/web/zhuantixuexizilia
o/Building%20Effective%20Blended%20Learning%20Programs.pdf on June 2012.
Singh, Harvi and Chris Reed, (2005) . “A White Paper: Achieving Success with Blended Learning.” Centra White Paper.
http://www.centra.com/download/whitepapers/blendedlearning.pdf
Thomson, I. (2002). Thomson job impact study: The next generation of corporate learning. Retrieved April 23, 2012, from
http://www.netg.com/DemosAndDownloads/Downloads/JobImpact.p df.
Vasay, E.T., The Effectiveness of Multimedia Instructional Materials in Trigonometry, Dissertation, DMMMSU – SLUC, June
1999.
Wallace, L and Young, J; downloaded at http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/winter134/wallace_young134.html,
November 8, 2012
Young, J. R. (2002). “Hybrid” teaching seeks to end the divide between traditional and online instruction. Chronicle of Higher
Education.