The State of Art, Advantages, and Shortcomings of Blended Learning (BL) While Applied in the Fields of Social Sciences: A Review Article

Blended learning (BL) has been introduced and infused from elementary to higher educational settings. In most cases, overall, the studies found that the stakeholders of blended learning enjoy an added opportunity of a better teaching-learning environment utilizing both f2f and online means of learning. However, most of the studies conducted on blended learning were focused on some specific fields of study or were focused on educational institutions or learners to answer some specific academic inquiries throughout the studies. However, very few studies have been concretely conducted on applying blended learning in the fields of social sciences. Therefore, the current study took the initiative to investigate the state-ofthe- art, merits and challenges of blended learning applied in social science. Blended learning has simultaneously brought about many advantages and challenges in social science. Benefits of BL include the cost-effectiveness of education, the customizability of material development, flexibility of teaching-learning activities, swift communication, the flexibility of progress tracking, the efficacy of assessment, reduction of physical presence, avoidance of time consumption, global availability of courses without border concern, and the opportunity of self-paced learning. However, BL has different demerits too, such as classroom design, the lack of technical skills, digital literacy, and competency of teachers and students for utilizing BL, which leads the students to face miscommunication, procrastination, technical illiteracy, poor Internet connection, along with technological problems such as outdated software, hardware, technologies, etc. Even the stakeholders do not fully understand the nature, functions, advantages, and techniques for designing the course aligned to the needs of BL; hence, they create asymmetry between the ideal use and benefit and the real practice of BL. This study mainly aimed to bring the issues involved in applying BL to the fields of social sciences to light.

Keywords: Blended learning (hybrid learning); Face-to-face (f2f); Online; Pedagogy; Synchronous learning

A variety of techniques and tools have been introduced since the 2000s [1] and are still being developed every day in educational settings and landscapes worldwide [2]. Blended learning is one of such newly introduced educational techniques [3] that has emerged and been introduced in educational settings during the last decades [4]. Blended learning is an approach that exploits the online and offline means (synchronous and asynchronous) to run the teachinglearning activities [5] and is considered complementary to face-toface learning activities [6]. The term itself determines the meaning of blended learning that requires both kinds of teaching activities such as a certain number of activities should be conducted as online classes with online resources and a certain number of activities should take place in the traditional way in the classroom with the physical interactions among teachers and students [7]. It combines face-to-face classroom interactions and computer-assisted systems into a class with a well-crafted portion of physical presence and virtual performances [8]. Garrison and Kanuka [6] define BL as “a thoughtful integration of classroom face-to-face learning experiences with online experiences.” BL has been involved with the combination of f2f and technology-assisted instruction [9].

As blended learning plays various roles depending on the context, it is very difficult to define it in concrete meaning and scope [10,11]. Instead, it has broadened its meaning through various educational techniques and practices, and it continues to expand, necessitating specific definitions for B-learning [12]. In short, blended learning means a mixture of online and in-person delivery in which a virtual role takes place and supplants many face-to-face (f2f) classroom activities instead of complementing the lessons [11]. The term blended learning (BL) has also been used as hybrid learning, online learning (OL), technology-mediated learning, and distributed learning [8,11]. It can be called OL based on the content delivery mode if the content covers 30%-79% in an online format [11,13]. However, some experts argue that BL should offer at least half of the f2f classroom activities [14].

Many scholars think that BL is the added use of technologies in the traditional classroom practice for delivering terse concepts as a supplement to a class [10]. However, it is a kind of model that helps to redesign the way of teaching by utilizing technologies that combine the physical and virtual ways of teaching [15]. BL has offered this new way that surpasses the difficulties of time and place compared to the traditional teaching style [16,17]. The flexibility and contingency of BL allow it to continuously transform and adapt to the next level of condition and widen the spectrum [18]. Also, it has shown positive outcomes in cost reduction, effectiveness, situational convenience, and customization for both literate and non-literate learners [19,20,21]. However, the overall success of blended learning (BL) depends on student satisfaction [22], as it is a major factor in determining the effectiveness of BL in instruction [10,23].

In the mentioned situation, experts consider blended learning to be one of the broad fields of study and practice that cannot be defined narrowly [11,14,24]. Rather, they consider blended learning to be a broad and evolving field that demands more detailed and discipline-specific definitions to capture its diverse applications comprehensively. Moreover, only a limited number of universities worldwide actively share comprehensive details about their courses conducted in a blended learning format [25]. Hence, BL has not been explored or proven yet how course designers or instructors create courses based on their expertise. This lack of evidence leaves the understanding of blended learning unclear for fellow practitioners [26]. Most studies related to BL were identified from some other stream than social science, which makes the practitioners of SS more confused, vulnerable, and resourceless to learn, design, and use BL in their teaching. Recognizing this gap, the current study is designed to investigate how blended learning enhances social science education, and the advantages and limitations of this pedagogical approach in various fields of social science.

Statement of concerns involved in BL and social sciences

BL has occupied its space and importance in every educational setting today [11]. It has been considered advantageous in different ways compared to other educational techniques such as only f2f learning or only e-learning or traditional way [27,28]. However, most of the existing empirical studies have been conducted on one or some specific academic problems such as the application of BL in teacher education programs [28], nursing education [29,30], mathematics education [31], engineering education [32,33], foreign language teaching-learning via BL [34]. Very few studies have been conducted on the disciplines that fall under social science, such as sociology, political science, and social or cultural studies [35-38]. In addition, most often, people visualize BL or any hybrid model of education as the means of learning a foreign language or as a supplementary classroom instruction method [39,40,41].

Hence, as a technology-enhanced pedagogical approach, blended learning (BL), so far, has not widely been acknowledged and associated with the programs targeting the streams of social sciences. One of the reasons behind this is the relatively less research, underrepresentation of BL, and the scarcity of scholarly investigations into the role of blended learning (BL) in social science. Hence, there is a need for a more detailed examination of the role of blended learning in the context of diverse and unexplored fields, especially in social science, which may provide a more explicit understanding of BL and involvement in this field. Based on this backdrop, the current inquiry aims to understand why Blended Learning (BL) does not extend the coverage or attempt to apply the principles across various fields, such as designing BL for social science or exploring the conditions of BL in the social science domain. The proposed study investigated the role, efficacy, and challenges of BL in social science studies. Therefore, this study is expected to inform readers regarding the insights, status, prospects, and challenges of BL in practice in the fields of social sciences.

Definition of Social Science

As the current study investigates the phenomena relating to social science, it requires a comprehensive meaning of social science and its scope before delving further [42]. In general, social science means a scholastic discipline or direction of study that studies human behavior, human society, socio-cultural aspects of human society, and human conduct in society [43]. The term social science generally covers a wide range of sub-disciplines of scholarly pursuit both socially and politically [44]. It commonly includes anthropology, economics, geography, history, political science, sociology, psychology, communicative studies, linguistics, law, education, behavioral science, environmental sciences, et cetera [44,45]. The fields of study mentioned above, referring to social science, could be examined using the blended learning model with the aid of assistive technologies.

Research questions

1. In what ways does BL facilitate the teaching and learning activities in the fields of education involved in social sciences?
2. What financial, social, personal, and pedagogical advantages does BL offer for the practitioners and learners of the social science stream?
3. What shortcomings do stakeholders still face in applying BL within social science technically and pedagogically?

There are plenty of applications of blended learning in language and literature learning in different contexts around the world [46,47,48]. Not only has the language learning curriculum exploited the opportunities of B-learning, but the fields of science have also welcomed the exploitation of B-learning to make the educational practice more live and flexible [49,50,51,52]. In addition, various attempts, and models, including the Science Learning Activities Model (SLAM), have been implemented to derive benefits from blended learning [26,53,54]. A notable study on BL was conducted by Çırak Kurt and Yıldırım [55] in Turkey that utilized the Q method to elicit learner perceptions and revealed a positive response from both students and teachers regarding the academic benefits of blended learning. In addition, Owston, York, & Malhotra [56] examined the role of blended learning (BL) and student perceptions across four distinct BL models focusing on design, interaction, learning, and satisfaction. The findings indicated that three of these models effectively satisfied learners in terms of interaction and learning outcomes, with one model being an exception. BL should begin its implementation with a well-researched and developed methodological framework for teaching social science, which may enhance the effectiveness of the hybrid teaching-learning process of the field [57].

Today more universities and educators have been offering courses online as blended courses worldwide [23,27,32,37,58]. The increased use of blended learning in pedagogy can be attributed to the developments and advancements in science and technology [59]. Online and blended learning (OBL) has recently been recognized with increased attention for justifying the educational landscape from the learners’ point of view rather than considering the providers’ perspective [60]. A study on teaching a foreign language by Shorustam & Marjona [61] has shown that a teachinglearning model that deploys an integrated model for facilitating the teaching can be very effective in benefitting foreign language learning among learners. Additionally, in certain regions, including India [62], prevalent issues exist related to educational inequalities. Blended learning has proven effective in addressing these challenges, particularly in providing educational opportunities for underprivileged children [63].

Though there are many studies on the advantageous applications of B-learning, it has still many challenges and shortcomings of blended learning at the practice level. For instance, Mozelius & Hettiarachchi’s [64] study on the application of BL in higher education asserted that alongside the success stories, BL still faces some of the challenges that were prevalent at the early age of BL, such as low pass rate, poor learning outcomes, et cetera. Rasheed et al. [1] focused on the challenges of BL faced by students, teachers, and institutions and found that students face the most difficulty when they need self-regulation and learn new technologies to benefit their education. Conversely, educators encounter challenges in learning and utilizing recently introduced technologies, while institutions face the task of selecting suitable technologies and providing training to teachers for the effective implementation of blended instructions in the classroom [1].

Curriculum design is an integral part of lesson delivery [65]. However, curriculum-based B-learning has not yet been developed due to the unidentified factors that influence the design of a course [64]. Furthermore, there are some of the critical challenges that still need to be solved while designing the environments for blended learning [66]. These challenges encompass the incorporation of flexibility, the promotion of interactions, the facilitation of students’ learning processes, and the cultivation of an effective learning climate [67]. Additionally, obstacles such as increased workload, course and time management issues, overlaps, and the establishment of harmony between face-to-face and online environments hinder the effective implementation of blended learning design [66].

In a comprehensive study conducted by Parks et al. [68], the preparedness of social, educational, and teachers across the Southeastern United States was examined. The findings indicated that teachers who identified as blended educators were largely newcomers, including novices. Consequently, the study suggests that fostering greater proficiency in blended classroom-based instruction could significantly enhance efficacy in the classroom. Adding to this, Asarta and Schmidt [69] delved into the blended learning experience of business students, contending that the impact of BL on the students’ performance was minimal or negligible. Instead, they emphasized that the student’s level of dedication and seriousness played a crucial role and made a significant difference.

Numerous studies have explored the implementation of blended learning (BL) in language acquisition [39,40,47,48,70,71]. Many universities have already tried to apply BL in educational settings for teaching and learning English in tertiary institutions [72]. For instance, Atmacasoy and Aksu [73] argued that the faculty of education adopts a blended learning model for training pre-service teachers more frequently than other fields of study. Moreover, an investigation conducted by Isda et al. [71] revealed substantial benefits of blended learning, particularly in enhancing English-speaking skills within high school settings. The research demonstrated a notable improvement in English speaking, with pre-test English speaking skills at 77.04 and post-test skills at 88.95, indicating a significant impact on English speaking proficiency in the classroom.

Another study by Zhu [24] found that the previous experiences of the learners and other situational variables such as international or local, full-time or part-time students, etc., mattered significantly on the practice of BL. Unlike international students, local and parttime students benefitted much more from the blended learning mode. However, the constant support and efficacy of teachers were very important variables for making BL successful [24]. While a majority of studies highlight the positive aspects of blended learning (BL), challenges persist, including issues, such as low internet speed, unstable connections, and teachers who may be less prepared and equipped for BL classes [62,74-76]. Adding to this, the relationship between perceived efficacy and satisfaction of BL by learners remains uncertain and unexplored in the literature [77].

The current review looked into the role, efficacy, drawbacks, and in-depth phenomena of using BL in social sciences. This study conducted multiple layers of the literature search that could help to answer the mentioned research questions directing this study to provide an impartial ground, synthesis, representation, and interpretation of the findings. As appropriate and quality literature is inevitable for eliciting a solid foundation for the study and making a legitimate conclusion, this study investigated the literature and resources as systematically as possible from different perspectives and sources. The literature that this study investigated includes books, published journal articles, dissertations, thesis papers, government reports, and publications, reviews from different government agencies and non-governmental organizations, periodicals, and other academic documents from relevant sources, such as databases.

This study utilized and retrieved resources from many relevant and leading databases for the literature, which included Web of Science (Social Science), ProQuest (Education Database ), SAGE Journals, Scopus, Springer Link, Taylor & Francis, Google Scholar, EBSCO – ERIC, Elsevier ScienceDirect, Emerald Ejournals and Wiley Online Library. The pieces of literature were identified and selected based on the appropriateness, relevance, and dates of the publications from journals, databases, and electronic and manual sources. This study included articles that aligned with the inquiries of the current research and helped validate the contents, concepts, and data that have been applied and represented in this article.

Fields Identified of Included Literature

The current review tried to stick to the stream of social sciences. However, most of the included literature regarding BL came from both arts and humanities and social sciences, such as language teaching-learning [34,78], education [29,30], higher education [79,80], teacher education [28], psychology [81,82] and a few other fields [29,30,32,58]. Most of this literature discusses the particular problem or certain efficacy of BL in a certain community or age group [23,83].

Moreover, a majority of the literature had been found from a select few countries such as the USA [68,84], Canada [30,85], New Zealand [86], Indonesia [37,87], Malaysia, Turkey [55,70,73,88- 93], Ghana [94], Uganda [23] that can avail the infrastructures and other equipment for applying BL in educational practice. However, many regions on different continents still cannot avail themselves of the required technologies and instructional resources to benefit their education [95]. Therefore, this study missed the opportunity to represent the conditions of BL around the geographies. Thus, the current study acknowledges that it would be more comprehensive if the literature had come equally from different backgrounds.

Many of the studies reviewed in this current study have explored how BL facilitates social science education and also identified various strengths and shortcomings of blended learning. It is not the fact that BL has only brought positive development in educational practice. Rather, it accompanied several difficulties as well. This study has categorized the findings into two major categories, i.e., positive developments by BL and negative aspects of blended learning while applying the educational fields targeting social sciences.

Advantages of using BL in social sciences

The advantages brought by blended learning were identified by dividing it into two categories: students and teachers.

Advantages for the students Quick feedback and community development opportunities

One of the most visible strengths of BL is that it allows the learners and the instructors a quick channel for communication through social interactions and feedback electronically [96]. BL has brought about a very high level of opportunity for interactions between the learner, instructor, content, and the course interface [97,98,99,100]. Likewise, Uzun and Özkılıç [101] and Orhan [89] commented that feedback is an important feature of blended learning. The sense of classroom community becomes a very significant sense of bondage among fellow learners of the BL course through different interactions [102]. Therefore, the experts always advocate for combining major variables such as field of study, course organization, students’ experience, etc., into consideration while designing a BL course so that the learners can make a proper channel for more customised and flexible communication among the fellow learners and between the students and teachers [103].

Facilitating online communication

Foreign language learners and teachers enjoy an added opportunity of continuous communication via the online model of communication in BL that helps them boost language learning speed and efficacy [70]. Moreover, BL helps the learners learn listening skills and vocabularies faster and smoother than other methods. Learning a foreign language was one of the scary and challenging parts of education and communication as it used to require a huge money, effort, time, and isolation while learning a foreign language [104]. However, today the technologies have offered these tremendous jobs to be solved virtually through online communication, friendship, interactions, and foreign language practice through virtual platforms [71].

Learning output and development of a positive attitude

Teacher education has a very close connection with BL as most of the pre-service teachers responded to BL as one of the most effective developments [93,105,106]. Participants of Mahiroğlu and Usta [90] expressed their positive impressions about the quick and constant virtual communications through technology enhanced means. Moreover, they were much more content with the learning materials in BL compared to the traditional classes [90]. Additionally, courses that enabled BL learners to regulate the pace of their learning fostered a progressively positive attitude compared to online learners.

Advantages for the teachers and institutions Flexibility and customizability of materials

BL has offered a possibility and scope of highly customizable resources and content for educating and learning through the BL courses [21]. It has not only offered opportunities for utilizing the technologies through digital platforms but also offered the opportunity for learning through pedagogically proven ways [10]. These courses allow variances of materials, design of the classes, customized time, and learning [107]. BL has offered an outstanding opportunity to develop customizable materials for face-to-face and virtual classes in an integrative model that considerably increases the learning outcome [21,108]. Once a teaching material is developed for the blended learning courses, it is then highly flexible to customize and fit for the next time and course with the maximum facility to adjust to new aims and objectives of the new course [11].

Eradicating inequality in education

In many countries, the schooling system is heavily biased towards the rich and poor, especially in public schools [109]. Public schools are somehow financially reachable; however, these schools are marked with the negligence of the teachers, inadequate training of teachers, insufficient teaching materials, and poor supervision of teachers and authority [62]. Often, the students drop out due to the negligence of teachers and management [76]. In this regard, BL has benefitted the underrepresented schoolchildren by preventing them from dropping out and by allowing them to learn better than in the traditional classroom [63]. In Mayr & Oppl [110] students from marginalized communities have expressed a strong preference for specific learning tasks and formats, particularly valuing interactions through global discussion boards and the flexibility provided by offline and multimedia learning packages. Additionally, the teaching method received positive recognition for being efficient and comfortable.

Technical and pedagogical challenges of applying blended learning

The challenges were also considered to be divided into two main categories: challenges for students and teachers.

Challenges faced by institutions and teachers

Technology changes every day, and educational institutions always need to update their management systems and educate teachers and students regularly to meet the demands of the time. The swift evolution of educational technology necessitates a proactive approach to curriculum development, ensuring that course content remains relevant, up-to-date, and reflective of the latest advancements in the field [111]. However, challenges remain in navigating the balance between embracing technological innovations and preserving the foundational principles of effective pedagogy, especially when incorporating blended learning into curricula [112]. The existing studies do not properly cover the difficulties faced by the institutions, rather, they limit their focus on the students’ and teachers’ perceptions, advantages, and challenges of BL [1]. Kaur [113] expressed that those institutions face hardship in selecting appropriate technologies for making BL successful. In addition, institutions usually have financial concerns such as maintenance costs, expenses for teachers’ training, and acquiring new gadgets, when it comes to incorporating BL-supporting technologies [114,115]. Assessing the technological effectiveness and pedagogical validity of devices is also challenging [116].

Teachers suffer from the lack of sufficient training for applying new technologies to blended learning ([1,117]. Teachers and students need the latest skills and training for practicing BL [10]. The experts argue that most of the institutions do not arrange sufficient training for the teachers and students, thinking that they do not need extensive training as they meet f2f [117]. Moreover, most institutions do not have a sufficient budget to provide training for BL teachers who deliver high-quality training [117]. Finally, there is always a problem of developing a mechanism of technological maintenance (e.g., fixing, troubleshooting, solving bugs, etc.) [115], and the teachers face technical issues often while they try to use those technologies.

Difficulties in designing the instructions and courses using the BL

Blended learning is limited in capacity for flexible integration concerning time, location, and learning progression, as well as in the creation of an effective learning environment [31]. As blended learning is based on the sophisticated applications of technologies, methodologies, and pedagogies, it requires a very balanced course design with methodological combinations of online and traditional (face-to-face) class activities [118,119]. Thus, the resource development for BL courses is a high-skill and effort-demanding task that requires much time, pedagogical and technological skill from the teachers [120,121,122]. The instructors need to juxtapose the online and offline activities focusing on the course variables such as the characteristics of students, the aims of the course, the context of the learning, et cetera [123]. However, still now, many faculties do not have any transparent idea regarding the infusion of technologies in their curriculum [121]. They are also not clear on how to develop the courses and design the course patterns that are integrative and aligned with pedagogies and technologies [124]. Therefore, it is highly essential to train teachers to cope with the utilization of technologies [125,126].

The poor technical skills and competencies among the teachers

Managing the online classes and creating content for both online and f2f modes of classes were (are) always constant challenges for a teacher [127]. The teachers reported that they face most challenges while they face the technical issues and operation of the BL system for operating a BL course [128]. They often lack the motivation to learn new technologies for offering BL courses [129]. Another concerning drawback is the lack of knowledge on how to create quality content for an online management system [130]. Teachers not only face challenges but also exhibit reluctance when they are required to acquire new technologies and competencies to align with emerging educational tools [127,131].

Making the video for the classes has been an added challenge for educators today [114]. It is not easy to make quality videos aligned with the pedagogical framework for delivering lessons for learners with different variants in their competency levels [132]. Moreover, there are many situations where the Internet does not work properly [75]. The teachers are under the challenge of operational skills of instructional technologies [133]. They suffer from time-consuming troubleshooting and resolving technical difficulties [75]. Moreover, surprisingly, many teachers hold a strong skepticism about the effectiveness of blended learning (BL) or online learning in general [86,134].

Challenges of engaging and motivating the students

Students are the most active and vital stakeholders of BL, and they are supposed to benefit from BL [33]. Yet, the most crucial challenge for educators is ensuring that learners are informed about the online materials accessible for studying on the designed BL platform [10]. As BL depends on the perfect combination of f2f and virtual interactions, it is highly recommended that educators hold an in-depth knowledge of space, material development, and time management systems to make the BL a successful delivery [66].

Challenges faced by students Miscommunication and failure of communication

Maintaining consistent and meaningful communication is a challenging aspect of implementing blended learning [6]. Timely feedback is essential for benefitting the learning while the students need it [135,136]. However, it is often experienced in this type of teaching-learning environment that the students do not get feedback or instruction when they need it urgently [137]. Asynchronous learning does not cover any specific schedule of the educators and learners which leads to unstable and inefficient communication between the educators and the learners [138]. If the learners cannot get the instruction they need urgently, then they might become very reluctant and demotivated from the blended learning courses [129].

Higher chances of procrastination among students

Blended learning allows learners much autonomy, which also paves the way for practicing laziness [1]. The online component of BL allows the learners the most flexible schedule for participation in the blended courses [139]. Hence, the learners require a high level of self-control to benefit from BL [67] and they face the difficulty of taking control of their actions and managing their time [66]. Gradually, the learners become habituated with the delay and procrastination in everything.

Unavailability of instant and constant online help

Multiple studies have highlighted that during the implementation of blended learning courses, teachers often faced challenges in providing consistent support stemming from the absence of instructors, particularly when they were not available for face-to-face interactions [1,114,140,141]. The students also faced difficulty in seeking help from the instructors and learned the technologies required for utilizing blended courses [142]. Most horrible situations occur when it comes to adult learners through BL courses, as they face difficulty and confusion regarding seeking help from online platforms [143]. Instead, they go for searching over other online platforms or search engines such as Google or Yahoo [74]. While they suffer from the less constant and reliable answers from their assigned platforms, they try to get help from other informal or less reliable but available sources from different sources, such as surfing different websites, posts, social media, and other informal platforms [140].

Lack of technical skills and digital literacy

The students require a variety of skills and awareness of technologies to adopt and receive education today [144]. Education and technology are getting amalgamated every day, which requires students to be savvy in blending education and technology [145]. However, recent studies show that students still suffer from a lack of digital literacy and skills in emerging technologies [146,147]. Moreover, the inefficiency in communication while continuing BL courses makes the learners procrastinate and become confused about their roles and time management [147]. Adult learners are the worst sufferers of technological difficulties [148,149]. Thus, the learners are often intimidated while they think of applying some unknown devices or techniques for classes [74]. Due to this, students enrolled in blended courses are strongly encouraged to possess sufficient digital competence to maximize the benefits of blended learning (BL), though, an opposite scenario has been observed in many cases [114,150]. Another added challenge of today is the ever-changing variations of different interfaces such as a wide range of software, hardware, and other embedded systems that require constant adaptation to keep updated [116].

Unavailability and technical issues with the devices and Internet

Studies indicate that learning activities are important for facilitating learning rather than only focusing on the delivery mode [151,152]. The learners want to be more interactive during their learning and want to be involved, exercise, and use the learning materials and tools often and smoothly [131,153]. If the students face difficulties while watching online lectures or downloading ebooks or videos, they get demotivated by the poorly abled data connection. However, sufficient studies from different regions and different times indicate that they suffer from poor internet speed and connection [62,74,75].

Blended learning requires highly adaptable and capable devices, software, and hardware that require a big budget to purchase [154]. It is not sufficient merely to acquire devices; learners must also become proficient in using them effectively to navigate competitive environments [146,147,155]. Moreover, many of the learners might not be able to purchase the required devices and software [114,141]. The low speed of the Internet is another problem that is prevalent in many cases and many places of the world where the Internet has not been sufficient to continue online classes [74]. Moreover, the device is outdated now and then. Unequal access to electronic and software resources may be viewed as an opportunity disparity [156]. Safford & Stinton [74] found that online activity is extremely troubled by the low quality of the Internet.

Complexity, anxiety, alienation, and demotivation of the learners

Human learners need company, and they feel very lonely and devoid of social connections while they stay disconnected socially [157]. While a learner is supposed to complete their study online, they become distracted [158]. Moreover, a significant number of students frequently experience discomfort when engaging in blended courses due to concerns such as communication difficulties (verbal delivery, voice tone, facial expression, accent, etc.), low-quality internet service quality, and the competitive online environment [159].

The students need to install and learn a variety of tools, software, and other complex systems to participate in the BL classes which puts huge pressure on the students [1]. They become more concerned about the required skills for having the classes than preparing them for the course contents that plan for learning from any particular course [116]. Another kind of the worst case is that many of the learners do not have some essential electronic or technological means at all, such as Wi-Fi or the streaming facility of YouTube, etc. [160]. The primary challenge with the pedagogical authenticity of blended learning (BL) is evident [161,162]. Research suggests that a majority of online videos and lectures often become information-heavy, losing pedagogical value.

Incomplete understanding of BL in detail among the stakeholders

Blended learning is under massive expansion all over the world; however, it has not been understood in its entirety yet [163]. A pedagogical study by Parks et al. [68] showed that teachers self-identifying as blended educators often lack adequate BL criteria knowledge. Only 21% of teachers were confirmed as BL practitioners, and standardized systems for BL implementation are scarce outside of IT classes [68]. In addition, Gear [45] observed that in many cases, no significant difference was found between traditional and blended learning. Moreover, the efficacy of group study had decreased in the BL course, particularly in science education [164].

Hence, it is crucial to make face-to-face interactions more accessible to enhance learning through direct engagement between fellow learners and the teacher [73,165]. Many studies indicate that there are two types of learners: the surface learner and another kind is the deep learner [166]. Even if both of these groups perform at the same level of academic achievement, there is a big difference between these two kinds of learners [88,92]. Blended Learning discourages surface learning and promotes deep learning by emphasizing comprehension, adjusting material presentation, and reducing lecture time [167]. It enables students to explore concepts deeply through quizzes, projects, and enrichment materials [167]. As a result, the BL method is unsuitable for surface learners.

Blended learning has already occupied a vital space in education and research worldwide, and the appeal of this approach is gradually increasing every day globally [168]. However, there is no published academic production yet that follows different models for different streams of educational fields [169]. Hence, the stream, namely, social science, does not have a range of resources or models to facilitate the teaching and learning activities in this area of education. Rather, blended learning (BL) is the most popular in language teaching, learning, and communication studies [170]. There are many studies on some specific portion of academic inquiries and practice, such as the student perception or the teachers’ acceptance, et cetera in general [171]. Therefore, the current study focused on the phenomena relating to the field of social sciences and blended learning.

The current study found that the researchers tended to focus on a few specific issues that relate to the teachers, students, and other stakeholders’ acceptance or similar issues. For example, the frequently researched areas cover (a) a comparison between blended learning and traditional learning [172], (b) analyzing the perception through different academic disciplines using BL [173], (c) flipped classroom and the students’ perceptions [174] and (d) analysis of time consumption on blended learning versus traditional classroom activities etc., [175]. These focal points have been sufficiently researched and interpreted throughout the current study from different points of view. There are many studies that focus on disciplines individually such as sociology and anthropology [87], economics [176], psychology [85], and so on [35,36,37,38]. However, these studies do not cover the wholesome case of a stream of education or a generalized understanding of applying BL in teaching social sciences.

However, the studied literature shows that some fields of social science exploited blended learning to be a more commonly used technique for running educational activities than other fields (majors) [35,36,37,38]. The fields that utilized the blended learning model more frequently are foreign language teaching and learning [39,40,47,48,71], education and research [26,53,177,178] anthropology [87], and information and communication technologies [58]. There are many other fields of study in social science that have not received much attention from researchers, such as political science, economics, and many more [179]. Most of the research fields studied in the current study indicate some common advantages and disadvantages prevalent in social science while applying blended learning [38,180].

The current article has found that the learners enjoy the opportunity for smooth communication and interactions while they receive the blended learning courses in social science majors because they do not have many courses that essentially require physical presence and demonstration, such as political science [37,181]. Instead, they interact with their instructors and peer learners through online communication platforms and facilitate metacognition along with quick responses to the platforms and the teachers [182,183]. In this way, they also enjoy autonomy in learning, a personalized way of learning, flexibility in learning, and avoiding physical travel and cost [21].

In the same way, teachers and institutions have been able to expand the scope of their educational practices more extensively than ever before [184]. They can design and offer their courses nationwide and even worldwide, and they can extend their service without the barriers of geographical boundaries [185]. Thus, they become universal, more democratic, dynamic, and multifaceted with the latest provision of knowledge discovered in any certain domain of knowledge [186]. Therefore, learners from different backgrounds can participate in learning activities reducing the inequality in education. Consequently, the blended model of teaching offers a way of educational transformation and revolution [187].

The disadvantages of blended learning cannot be ignored as well. This type of teaching practice requires huge peripheral equipment and system installation [188]. Therefore, the learners suffer from uneasiness and anxiety about learning the new techniques for attending the classes [94]. Many of the students also might not have access to the latest technologies to benefit from blended learning [156]. BL needs high-speed internet connectivity, devices, techniques, and training by the stakeholders that are very difficult to meet [84,178]. Moreover, the technologies cost huge amounts of money beyond the affordance of the learners [84,189]. Thus, BL is still in the position of research and adaptation.

Research gap and recommendation for the future

Most of the advantages and drawbacks of BL have emerged from the online parts of blended learning [1], as almost, no study took the online and offline parts to be equally important for the study. Nevertheless, we know that blended learning consists of both online and offline versions of interactions [11]. Therefore, f2f and online parts must be included in any research to elicit the original advantages and challenges of BL. Educators encounter numerous challenges in organising both online and face-to-face components of blended learning classes [190]. However, existing studies tend to give minimal attention to the face-to-face (f2f) aspect of blended learning. The students also must face some variations and difficulties in coping with both the modes online and f2f. It requires attention and in-depth studies, of course. Future studies should be focused and conducted on both sides, i.e., online and f2f [191,192,193].

None.

No conflict of interest.

1. Rasheed RA, Kamsin A, Abdullah NA (2020) Challenges in the online component of blended learning: A systematic review. Computers and Education 144: 103701.
2. Serdyukov P (2017) Innovation in education: what works, what doesn’t, and what to do about it? Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning 10(1): 4-33.
3. Rao VCS, Science EF (2019) Blended Learning: A New Hybrid Teaching Methodology. ResearchGate 3: 7.
4. Mims-Word Marsha (2016) Enhancing Students’ Language Skills through Blended Learning. Electronic Journal of E-Learning 14(3): 220-229.
5. Strauss V (2012) Three fears about blended learning - The Washington Post. The Washington Post.
6. Garrison DR, Vaughan ND (2008) Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles, and guidelines. John Wiley & Sons.
7. Oliver J (2013) 済無No Title No Title. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 53(9): 1689-1699.
8. Graham CR, Woodfield W, Harrison JB (2013) A framework for institutional adoption and implementation of blended learning in higher education. Internet and Higher Education 18: 4-14.
9. Porter WW, Graham CR, Spring KA, Welch KR (2014) Blended learning in higher education: Institutional adoption and implementation. Computers & Education 75: 185-195.
10. Medina LC (2018) Blended learning: Deficits and prospects in higher education. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 34(1).
11. Siemens G, Skrypnyk O, Joksimovic S, Kovanovic V, Dawson S, et al. (2015) The history and state of blended learning. Preparing for the Digital University: A Review of the History and Current State of Distance, Blended, and Online Learning 234.
12. Graham CR (2005) Blended learning systems. The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs 1: 3-21.
13. Means B, Toyama Y, Murphy R, Bakia M, Jones K (2010) Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning. Structure 94.
14. Bernard RM, Borokhovski E, Schmid RF, Tamim RM, Abrami PC (2014) A meta-analysis of blended learning and technology use in higher education: From the general to the applied. Journal of Computing in Higher Education 26(1): 87-122.
15. Bleed R (2001) A hybrid campus for the new millennium. Educause Review 36: 16-25.
16. Chen CC, Jones KT (2007) Blended learning vs. Traditional classroom settings: Analyzing students' satisfaction with inputs and learning processes in an MBA accounting course. Advances in Accounting Education: Teaching and Curriculum Innovations.
17. Melton B, Graf H, Chopak-Foss J (2009) Achievement and satisfaction in blended learning versus traditional general health course designs. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning 3(1): n1.
18. Helms ER, Aragon AA, Fitschen PJ (2014) Evidence-based recommendations for natural bodybuilding contest preparation: Nutrition and supplementation. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 11(1): 1-20.
19. Brown R (2003) Blending learning: Rich experiences from a rich picture. Training and Development in Australia 30(3): 14-17.
20. Ho A, Lu L, Thurmaier K (2006) Testing the reluctant professor’s hypothesis: Evaluating a blended-learning approach to distance education. Journal of Public Affairs Education 12(1): 81-102.
21. Alamri HA, Watson S, Watson W (2021) Learning technology models that support personalization within blended learning environments in higher education. Tech Trends 65: 62-78.
22. Chang V, Fisher D (2001) The validation and application of a new learning environment instrument to evaluate online learning in higher education. In Proceedings of the Australian Association for Research in Education conference 2001. Australian Association for Research in Education.
23. Kintu MJ, Zhu C (2016) Student characteristics and learning outcomes in a blended learning environment intervention in a Ugandan University. Electronic Journal of e-Learning 14(3): 181-195.
24. Zhu C (2017) University student satisfaction and perceived effectiveness of a blended learning course. International Journal of Learning Technology 12(1): 66-83.
25. Tham R, Tham L (2013) Challenges facing blended learning in higher education in Asia. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). International Journal on E-Learning 12(2): 209-219.
26. Alammary A (2019) Blended learning models for introductory programming courses: A systematic review. PLOS ONE 14(9): e0221765.
27. Tayebinik M, Puteh M (2013) Blended Learning or E-learning? ArXiv. /abs/1306.4085.
28. Keengwe J, Kang JJ (2013) A review of empirical research on blended learning in teacher education programs. Education and Information Technologies 18(3): 479-493.
29. Consuelo M, Arnaiz González Á (2019) Effectiveness of Blended Learning in Nursing Education. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17(5): 1589.
30. Berga KA, Vadnais E, Nelson J, Johnston S, Buro K, et al. (2021) Blended learning versus face-to-face learning in an undergraduate nursing health assessment course: A quasi-experimental study. Nurse Education Today 96: 104622.
31. Tong DH, Uyen BP, Ngan LK (2022) The effectiveness of blended learning on students' academic achievement, self-study skills and learning attitudes: A quasi-experiment study in teaching the conventions for coordinates in the plane. Heliyon 8(12): e12657.
32. Ożadowicz A (2020) Modified Blended Learning in Engineering Higher Education during the COVID-19 Lockdown—Building Automation Courses Case Study. Education Sciences 10(10): 292.
33. Mielikäinen M (2021) Towards blended learning: Stakeholders’ perspectives on a project-based integrated curriculum in ICT engineering education. Industry and Higher Education 36(1): 74-85.
34. Sarré C, Grosbois M, Brudermann C (2019) Fostering accuracy in L2 writing: impact of different types of corrective feedback in an experimental blended learning EFL course. Computer Assisted Language Learning 34(5-6): 707-729.
35. Gault J, Cuevas J (2022) Uses of blended learning and its impact in a high school social studies classroom. International Journal of Technology in Education (IJTE) 5(3): 383-410.
36. Martanto SD, Pramono SE, Sanjoto TB (2021) The Implementation of Blended Learning in Social Studies Learning for 21st Century Skills Enhancement. Journal of Educational Social Studies 10(1): 9-18.
37. Damanik EL (2020) Blended Learning: An Innovative Approach on Social Sciences at Indonesian Higher Education. Education Quarterly Reviews 3(1).
38. Gomez CJ, Hinojo-Lucena FJ, Moreno-Vera JR, Alonso-Garcia S (2022) Analysis of a forced blended learning program in social sciences higher education during the COVID-19 post-pandemic. Education and Training 65(24).
39. Hubackova S, Semradova I, Klimova BF (2011) Blended learning in a foreign language teaching. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 28: 281-285.
40. Ju SY, Mei SY (2018) Perceptions and practices of blended learning in foreign language teaching at USIM. European Journal of Social Sciences Education and Research 12(1): 170-176.
41. Ramalingam S, Yunus MM, Hashim H (2022) Blended learning strategies for sustainable English as a second language education: a systematic review. Sustainability 14(13): 8051.
42. McFarland David, Lave Charles, March James (1977) An Introduction to Models in Social Sciences. Contemporary Sociology 6: 196.
43. Prout Alan, James A (1997) A new paradigm for the sociology of childhood? Provenance, Promise and Problems.
44. Cooper HM (1984) The integrative research review pp.143.
45. Gear Ö (2012) Improving writing skills through supplementary computer-assisted activities. Unpublished PhD Dissertation. Gazi University Graduate School of Educational Sciences, Ankara.
46. Tawil H (2018) The blended learning approach and its application in language teaching. International Journal of Language and Linguistics 5(4).
47. Rivera JL (2019) Blended learning-effectiveness and application in teaching and learning foreign languages. Open Journal of Modern Linguistics 9(2): 129-144.
48. Ihnatova O, Poseletska K, Matiiuk D, Hapchuk Y, Borovska O (2021) The application of digital technologies in teaching a foreign language in a blended learning environment. Linguistics and Culture Review 5(S4): 114-127.
49. Stockwell BR, Stockwell MS, Cennamo M, Jiang E (2015) Blended learning improves science education. Cell 162(5): 933-936.
50. Movahedzadeh F (2011) Improving students’ attitude toward science through blended learning. Science education and civic engagement 3(2): 13-19.
51. Sancho P, Corral R, Rivas T, González MJ, Chordi A, et al. (2006) A blended learning experience for teaching microbiology. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 70(5).
52. Khalil MK, Abdel Meguid EM, Elkhider IA (2018) Teaching of anatomical sciences: A blended learning approach. Clinical Anatomy 31(3): 323-329.
53. Alkhatib OJ (2018) An interactive and blended learning model for engineering education. Journal of Computers in Education 5(1): 19-48.
54. Bidarra J, Rusman E (2017) Towards a pedagogical model for science education: bridging educational contexts through a blended learning approach. Open Learning 32(1): 6-20.
55. Çırak Kurt S, Yıldırım İ (2018) The students’ perceptions on blended learning: A Q method analysis. Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Bilimleri 18(2): 427-446.
56. Owston R, York D, Malhotra T (2019) Blended learning in large enrolment courses: Student perceptions across four different instructional models. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 35(5): 29-45.
57. Soler R, Soler JR, Araya I (2017) Subjects in the Blended Learning Model Design. Theoretical-Methodological elements. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 237: 771-777.
58. Chaykina ZV, Mukhina MV, Gruzdeva ML, Smirnova ZV, Golubeva OV (2022) Integration of information, communication, and pedagogical technologies in the framework of blended learning in classes with students at pedagogical university. Digital Education in Russia and Central Asia. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore pp. 383-389.
59. Alzahrani MG (2017) The Developments of ICT and the Need for Blended Learning in Saudi Arabia. Journal of Education and Practice 8(9): 79-87.
60. Blieck Y, Ooghe I, Zhu C, Depryck K, Struyven K, et al. (2019) Consensus among stakeholders about success factors and indicators for quality of online and blended learning in adult education: a Delphi study. Studies in Continuing Education 41(1): 36-60.
61. Shorustam N, Marjona N (2020) Effective Combination of Different Teaching Methods, Teaching Models and Technologies. Blended Learning 57: 589-595.
62. Kumar AK, Rustagi P (2010) Elementary education in India: Progress, Setbacks, and challenges.
63. Dey P, Bandyopadhyay S (2019) Blended learning to improve quality of primary education among underprivileged school children in India. Education and Information Technologies 24(3): 1995-2016.
64. Mozelius P, Hettiarachchi E (2017) Critical Factors for Implementing Blended Learning in Higher Education. International Journal of Information and Communication Technologies in Education 6(2): 37-51.
65. McConnell C, Conrad B, Uhrmacher PB (2020) Lesson planning with purpose: Five approaches to curriculum design. Teachers College Press.
66. Gedik N, Kiraz E, Ozden MY (2013) Design of a blended learning environment: Considerations and implementation issues. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 29(1): 1-19.
67. Boelens R, De Wever B, Voet M (2017) Four key challenges to the design of blended learning: A systematic literature review. Educational Research Review 22: 1-18.
68. Parks RA, Oliver W, Carson E (2016) the Status of Middle and High School Instruction: Examining Professional Development, Social Desirability, and Teacher Readiness for Blended Pedagogy in the Southeastern United States. Journal of Online Learning Research 2(2): 79-101.
69. Asarta CJ, Schmidt JR (2020) The effects of online and blended experience on outcomes in a blended learning environment. Internet and Higher Education 44: 100708.
70. Güler S (2018) Podcasting in pre-service language teacher education: A constructivist perspective. Published Master of Arts Thesis). Adana, Turkey: Çukurova University.
71. Isda ID, Purwati P, Imran I (2021) the Effect of Using Blended Learning Model on Enhancing Students’ Speaking Skill in Senior High Schools. Journal of Languages and Language Teaching 9(1): 92.
72. Bryan A, Volchenkova KN (2016) Blended learning: definition, models, implications for higher education. Вестник Южно-Уральского государственного университета. Серия: Образование. Педагогические науки 8(2).
73. Atmacasoy A, Aksu M (2018) Blended learning at pre-service teacher education in Turkey: A systematic review. Education and Information Technologies 23(6): 2399-2422.
74. Safford K, Stinton J (2016) Barriers to blended digital distance vocational learning for non‐traditional students. British Journal of Educational Technology 47(1): 135-150.
75. Leo J, Puzio K (2016) Flipped instruction in a high school science classroom. Journal of Science Education and Technology 25(5): 775-781.
76. Dreze J (2003) Patterns of Literacy and Their Social Context. In V. Das et al. (Eds.), The Oxford India.
77. Seo YJ, Um KH (2023) The role of service quality in fostering different types of perceived value for student blended learning satisfaction. Journal of Computing in Higher Education 35(3): 521-549.
78. Neumeier P (2005) A closer look at blended learning-parameters for designing a blended learning environment for language teaching and learning. ReCALL 17(2): 163-178.
79. Caner M (2012) The definition of blended learning in higher education. Blended learning environments for adults: Evaluations and frameworks pp. 19-34.
80. Alammary A, Sheard J, Carbone A (2014) Blended learning in higher education: Three different design approaches. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 30(4).
81. Deivam M, Devaki N (2015) Effectiveness of blended learning approach in teaching of educational psychology among b. ed trainees. Int. J. Dev. Res 5(09): 5558-5561.
82. Sockol LE, Ellison WD, Stutts LA, Knouse LE (2021) Improving Quantitative Abilities and Attitudes in Clinical Psychology Courses: Longitudinal Assessment of a Blended Learning Intervention. Teaching of Psychology.
83. Arkhipova MV, Belova EE, Gavrikova YA, Lyulyaeva NA, Shapiro ED (2018) Blended learning in teaching EFL to different age groups. The Impact of Information on Modern Humans. Springer International Publishing pp. 380-386.
84. Bakir N, Devers C, Hug B (2016) Affordances and Constraints of a Blended Course in a Teacher Professional Development Program. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia 25(4): 323-341. Waynesville, NC USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
85. Sana F, Fenesi B, Kim JA (2011) A Case Study of the Introductory Psychology Blended Learning Model at McMaster University. Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning 2(1): 6.
86. Pilgrim M, Hornby G, Macfarlane S (2018) Enablers and barriers to developing competencies in a blended learning programme for specialist teachers in New Zealand. Educational Review 70(5): 548-564.
87. Saroinsong DM, Takaendengan W (2022) Implementation of Blended Learning to Increase the Competence of Non-formal Education Undergraduate Students in the Sociology Anthropology Course. Empowerment: Jurnal Ilmiah Program Studi Pendidikan Luar Sekolah 11(1): 18-27.
88. Pesen A (2014) Harmanlanmış öğrenme ortamının öğretmen adaylarının akademik başarısına, ders çalışma alışkanlıklarına ve güdülenme düzeylerine etkisi. Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi), Dicle Üniversitesi, Diyarbakır.
89. Orhan F (2008) Redesigning a course for blended learning environment. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education 9(1): 54-66.
90. Mahiroğlu A, Usta E (2008) Harmanlanmış Öğrenme Ve Çevrimiçi Öğrenme Ortamlarının Akademik Başarı Ve Doyuma Etkisi. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi. (KEFAD) 9(2): 1-15.
91. Hos R, Yagci H, Cinarbas HI (2016) Turkish EFL students’ perceptions about blended English courses in a teacher education program. International Journal of Social Sciences and Education Research 2(3): 774-784.
92. Aydemir S (2012) The effect of blended learning on pre-service science teachers views about nature of science and scientific inquiry.
93. Balci M, Soran H (2009) Students’ opinions on blended learning. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education 10(1): 21-35.
94. Bervell B, Umar IN (2020) Blended learning or face-to-face? Does Tutor anxiety prevent the adoption of Learning Management Systems for distance education in Ghana? Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning 35(2): 159-177.
95. Ali W (2020) Online and remote learning in higher education institutes: A necessity in light of COVID-19 pandemic. Higher education studies 10(3): 16-25.
96. Karoglu AK, Kiraz E, Özden MY (2014) Good practice principles in an undergraduate blended course design. Egitim ve Bilim 39(173).
97. Hewitt J (2003) How habitual online practices affect the development of asynchronous discussion threads. Journal of Educational Computing Research 28(1): 31-45.
98. Moore MG (1989) Editorial: Three types of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education 3(2): 1-7.
99. Sutton LA (2001) The principle of vicarious interaction in computer-mediated communications. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications 7(3): 223-242.
100. Wagner ED (1997) Interactivity: From agents to outcomes. New directions for teaching and learning 71: 19-26.
101. Uzun A, ÖZKILIÇ R (2012) Students'views on Blended Learning Environment Designed for Programming Languages Course. Education Sciences 7(2): 638-646.
102. Yapici İÜ (2016) Effectiveness of Blended Cooperative Learning Environment in Biology Teaching: Classroom Community Sense, Academic Achievement and Satisfaction. Journal of Education and Training Studies 4(4): 269-280.
103. Means B, Toyama Y, Murphy R, Baki M (2013) The effectiveness of online and blended learning: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Teachers College Record 115(3): 1-47.
104. Hyland K (2016) Academic publishing and the myth of linguistic injustice. Journal of Second Language Writing 31: 58-69.
105. Döş İ (2014) Some model suggestions for measuring effective schools. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 116: 1454-1458.
106. Uluyol AGÇ, Karadeniz Ş (2009) An example of a blended learning environment, student achievement and views. Yüzüncü Yıl University Journal of Education 6(1): 60-84.
107. Harvey M, Huber E (2012) Expanding the horizons of professional learning: A foundations alumni network.
108. Krylova-Grek Y, Shyshkina M (2020) Blended learning method for improving students’ media literacy level. CEUR Workshop Proceedings 2732: 1272-1285.
109. Dabla-Norris E, Gradstein M (2004) The Distributional Bias of Public Education: Causes and Consequences. IMF Working Paper No. 04/214. SSRN.
110. Mayr A, Oppl S (2023) Higher education at the margins - success criteria for blended learning systems for marginalized communities. Education and Information Technologies 28(10): 2579-2617.
111. Grimus M (2020) Emerging technologies: Impacting learning, pedagogy, and curriculum development. Emerging technologies and pedagogies in the curriculum pp.127-151.
112. Rapanta C, Botturi L, Goodyear P, Guàrdia L, Koole M (2021) Balancing technology, pedagogy and the new normal: Post-pandemic challenges for higher education. Postdigital Science and Education 3(3): 715-742.
113. Kaur M (2013) Blended Learning - Its Challenges and Future. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 93: 612-617.
114. Akçayır G, Akçayır M (2018) The flipped classroom: A review of its advantages and challenges. Computers & Education 126: 334-345.
115. Dehghanzadeh S, Jafaraghaee F (2018) Comparing the effects of traditional lecture and flipped classroom on nursing students' critical thinking disposition: A quasi-experimental study. Nurse education today 71: 151-156.
116. Prasad PWC, Maag A, Redestowicz M, Hoe LS (2018) Unfamiliar technology: Reaction of international students to blended learning. Computers and Education 122: 92-103.
117. Zhao S, Song J (2021) What kind of support do teachers really need in a blended learning context?. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 37(4): 116-129.
118. Adams J (2013) Blended learning: Instructional design strategies for maximizing impact. International Journal on E-Learning 12(1): 23-44.
119. Vaughan N (2007) Perspectives on blended learning in higher education. International Journal on E-learning 6(1): 81-94.
120. Brill JM, Galloway C (2007) Perils and promises: University instructors’ integration of technology in classroom‐based practices. British Journal of Educational Technology 38(1): 95-105.
121. Jeffrey LM, Milne J, Suddaby G, Higgins A (2014) Blended learning: How teachers balance the blend of online and classroom components. Journal of Information Technology Education 13.
122. Tabor SW (2007) Narrowing the distance: Implementing a hybrid learning model for information security education. Quarterly Review of Distance Education 8(1): 47.
123. Stacey E, Gerbic P (2007) Teaching for blended learning--Research perspectives from on-campus and distance students. Education and information technologies 12(3): 165-174.
124. So HJ, Kim B (2009) Learning about problem based learning: Student teachers integrating technology, pedagogy and content knowledge. Australasian Journal of educational technology 25(1).
125. Vrasidas C, Glass GV (Eds.) (2005) Preparing teachers to teach with technology. IAP.
126. Volery T, Lord D (2000) Critical success factors in online education. International journal of educational management.
127. Bower M, Sturman D (2015) What are the educational affordances of wearable technologies? Computers & Education 88: 343-353.
128. Ashraf MA, Mollah S, Perveen S, Shabnam N, Nahar L (2022) Pedagogical applications, prospects, and challenges of blended learning in chinese higher education: a systematic review. Frontiers in psychology 12: 772322.
129. Antwi-Boampong A (2021) An investigation into barriers impacting against faculty blended learning adoption. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education 22(3): 281-292.
130. Maycock KW, Lambert J, Bane D (2018) Flipping learning not just content: A 4‐year action research study investigating the appropriate level of flipped learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 34(6): 661-672.
131. Hung ML, Chou C (2015) Students' perceptions of instructors' roles in blended and online learning environments: A comparative study. Computers & Education 81: 315-325.
132. Woolfitt Z (2015) The effective use of video in higher education. Lectoraat Teaching, Learning and Technology Inholland University of Applied Sciences 1(1): 1-49.
133. Kaplarević-Mališić A, Dimitrijević S, Radojevic I, Kovačević M (2022) Developing Teaching Competencies for Implementing Blended Learning in Higher Education: Experiences of Faculty of Science, University of Kragujevac. In 9th International Scientific Conference Technics and Informatics in Education.
134. Zengin Y (2017) Investigating the use of the Khan Academy and mathematics software with a flipped classroom approach in mathematics teaching. Journal of Educational Technology & Society 20(2): 89-100.
135. Wells G (2002) for Learning, Teaching and Teacher Education. Learning for life in the 21st century 197.
136. Lim DH, Morris ML (2009) Learner and instructional factors influencing learning outcomes within a blended learning environment. Educational Technology & Society 12(4): 282-293.
137. González A (2018) Turning a traditional teaching setting into a feedback-rich environment. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education 15: 32.
138. Chandha FY, Chowdury MAU (2023) Teachers’ Perception of Using Technology in a Blended Learning Environment to Facilitate Collaborative Learning in Bangladesh. In 19th International Conference of the Asia Association of Computer-Assisted Language Learning (AsiaCALL 2022) Atlantis Press. pp.21-33.
139. Waha B, Davis K (2014) University students’ perspective on blended learning. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 36(2): 172-182.
140. Broadbent J (2017) Comparing online and blended learner's self-regulated learning strategies and academic performance. The Internet and Higher Education 33: 24-32.
141. Chen L, Chen TL, Chen NS (2015) Students’ perspectives of using cooperative learning in a flipped statistics classroom. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 31(6).
142. Er E, Kopcha TJ, Orey M, Dustman W (2015) Exploring college students’ online help-seeking behavior in a flipped classroom with a web-based help-seeking tool. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 31(5).
143. Davidse ZAA (2021) Learning by design: enhancing the digital literacy of adult learners in a blended learning environment (Doctoral dissertation, Stellenbosch: Stellenbosch University).
144. Blake R (2016) Technology and the Four Skills. Language Learning & Technology 20(2): 129-142.
145. Walsh M (2010) Multimodal literacy: What does it mean for classroom practice?. The Australian Journal of Language and Literacy 33(3): 211-239.
146. Brown MG (2016) Blended instructional practice: A review of the empirical literature on instructors' adoption and use of online tools in face-to-face teaching. The Internet and Higher Education 31: 1-10.
147. Zacharis NZ (2015) A multivariate approach to predicting student outcomes in web-enabled blended learning courses. The Internet and Higher Education 27: 44-53.
148. Salim H, Lee PY, Ghazali SS, Ching SM, Ali H, et al. (2018) Perceptions toward a pilot project on blended learning in Malaysian family.
149. Chen SC, Yang SJ, Hsiao CC (2016) Exploring student perceptions, learning outcome and gender differences in a flipped mathematics course. British Journal of Educational Technology 47(6): 1096-1112.
150. Jensen JL, Kummer TA, Godoy PDDM (2015) Improvements from a flipped classroom may simply be the fruits of active learning. CBE—Life Sciences Education 14(1): ar5.
151. Banerjee G (2011) Blended environments: Learning effectiveness and student satisfaction at a small college in transition. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 15(1): 8-19.
152. Manwaring KC, Larsen R, Graham CR, Henrie CR, Halverson LR (2017) Investigating student engagement in blended learning settings using experience sampling and structural equation modeling. The Internet and Higher Education 35: 21-33.
153. Bueno-Alastuey MC, López Pérez MV (2014) Evaluation of a blended learning language course: students’ perceptions of appropriateness for the development of skills and language areas. Computer Assisted Language Learning 27(6): 509-527.
154. Castro R (2019) Blended learning in higher education: Trends and capabilities. Education and Information Technologies 24 (4): 2523-2546.
155. Patmanthara S, Hidayat WN (2018) Improving vocational high school students’ digital literacy skill through blended learning model. Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1028: 012076.
156. Fovet F (2021) Exploring the Use of Universal Design for Learning to Support In-Service Teachers in the Design of Socially-Just Blended Teaching Practices. In Re-Envisioning and Restructuring Blended Learning for Underprivileged Communities. IGI Global pp.143-164.
157. Bayyat M, Muaili ZHA, Aldabbas L (2021) Online component challenges of a blended learning experience: A comprehensive approach. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education 22(4): 277-294.
158. Chyr WL, Shen PD, Chiang YC, Lin JB, Tsai CW (2017) Exploring the effects of online academic help-seeking and flipped learning on improving students’ learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society 20(3): 11-23.
159. Garrison DR (2011) E-learning in the 21st century: A framework for research and practice. Taylor & Francis.
160. Wang Z (2014) Developing accuracy and fluency in spoken English of Chinese EFL learners. English Language Teaching 7(2): 110-118.
161. Saltan F (2017) Blended learning experience of students participating pedagogical formation program: Advantages and limitation of blended education. International Journal of Higher Education 6(1): 63-73.
162. Alam S, Albozeidi HF, Al-Hawamdeh BOS, Ahmad F (2022) Practice and principle of blended learning in ESL/EFL pedagogy: strategies, techniques, and challenges. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (Online) 17(11): 225.
163. Benson V, Kolsaker A (2015) Instructor approaches to blended learning: A tale of two business schools. The International Journal of Management Education 13(3): 316-325.
164. Güler B, Şahin M (2016) Fen öğretiminde karma öğrenme: öz-yeterlik inancı ve teknolojiye yönelik tutuma etkisi.
165. Yaman M, Graf D (2010) Evaluation of an international blended learning cooperation project in biology teacher education. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET 9(2): 87-96.
166. Yilmaz MB, Orhan F (2010) Pre-Service English Teachers in Blended Learning Environment in Respect to Their Learning Approaches. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET 9(1): 157-164.
167. Haripersad R (2011) Deep and surface learning of elementary calculus concepts in a blended learning environment. International Journal of Mathematics and Computers in Simulation 5(4): 291-298.
168. Hilliard AT (2015) Global blended learning practices for teaching and learning, leadership, and professional development. Journal of International Education Research 11(3): 179-188.
169. Drysdale JS, Graham CR, Spring KJ, Halverson LR (2013) An analysis of research trends in dissertations and theses studying blended learning. The Internet and Higher Education 17: 90-100.
170. Pardede P (2012) Blended Learning for ELT. Online Submission 2(3): 165-178.
171. Babić S (2012) Factors that influence academic teacher's acceptance of e-learning technology in blended learning environment. E-learning-organizational infrastructure and tools for specific areas pp.1-18.
172. Larson DK, Sung CH (2009) Comparing student performance: Online versus blended versus face-to-face. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 13(1): 31-42.
173. Dziuban C, Hartman J, Juge F, Moskal P, Sorg S (2006) Blended learning enters the mainstream. The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs 195: 206.
174. Ramnanan CJ, Pound LD (2017) Advances in medical education and practice: student perceptions of the flipped classroom. Adv Med Educ Pract 8: 63-73.
175. Owston RD, York DN (2018) The nagging question when designing blended courses: Does the proportion of time devoted to online activities matter? Internet and Higher Education 36: 22-32.
176. Azis YM (2013) The effectiveness of blended learning, prior knowledge to the understanding concept in economics. Educational Research International 2(2): 106-116.
177. Akram H, Abdelrady AH, Al-Adwan AS, Ramzan M (2022) Teachers’ perceptions of technology integration in teaching-learning practices: A systematic review. Frontiers in psychology 13: 920317.
178. Cullinan J, Flannery D, Harold J, Lyons S, Palcic D (2021) The disconnected: COVID-19 and disparities in access to quality broadband for higher education students. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education 18(26).
179. Singh S, Shivam R, Yaduvanshi S (2016) Effectiveness of blended learning in economics classroom. International Journal of Academic Research and Development 1(4): 13-15.
180. Makeeva YE, Lopukhova Y (2017) Teaching humanities and social sciences: From traditional approach to blended learning. New Trends and Issues Proceedings on Humanities and Social Sciences 4(1): 700-709.
181. Denisova DA, Levanova NG, Evgrafova IV, Verkhovod AS (2021) Formation of cognitive activity of technical university students using elements of blended learning in the study of quantum physics. Revista Tempos e Espaços em Educação 14(33).
182. Ma J, Li C, Liang HN (2019) Enhancing students’ blended learning experience through embedding metaliteracy. Education Research International.
183. Tay HY (2016) Investigating engagement in a blended learning course. Cogent Education 3(1): 1135772.
184. Barbour M, Brown R, Waters LH, Hoey R, Hunt JL, et al. (2011) Online and Blended Learning: A Survey of Policy and Practice from K-12 Schools around the World. International Association for K-12 Online Learning.
185. Rossett A, Frazee RV (2006) Blended learning opportunities. AMA Real Estate: AMA Special Report pp.1-27.
186. Schweisfurth M (2020) Future pedagogies: reconciling multifaceted realities and shared visions. Paper commissioned for the UNESCO Futures of Education report (forthcoming, 2021).
187. Graham CR, Robison R (2007) Realizing the transformational potential of blended learning: Comparing cases of transforming blends and enhancing blends in higher education. Blended learning: Research perspectives pp.83-110.
188. Sun Z, Liu R, Luo L, Wu M, Shi C (2017) Exploring collaborative learning effect in blended learning environments. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 33(6): 575-587.
189. Bani Hani NA (2014) Benefits and Barriers of Computer Assisted Language Learning and Teaching in the Arab World: Jordan as a Model. Theory and Practice in Language Studies 4(8): 1609-1615.
190. Glogowska M, Young P, Lockyer L, Moule P (2011) How ‘blended ‘is blended learning?: Students' perceptions of issues around the integration of online and face-to-face learning in a continuing professional development (CPD) health care context. Nurse education today 31(8): 887-891.
191. Bicen H, Ozdamli F, Uzunboylu H (2014) Online and blended learning approach on instructional multimedia development courses in teacher education. Interactive Learning Environments 22(4): 529-548.
192. Bizami NA, Tasir Z, Kew SN (2023) Innovative pedagogical principles and technological tools capabilities for immersive blended learning: A systematic literature review. Educational Information Technology 28: 1373-1425.
193. Garrison DR, Kanuka H (2004) Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The internet and higher education 7(2): 95-105.