Hybrid Learning in Higher Education: An Analysis of Online and Face-to-Face Instruction
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22154143Keywords:
Hybrid Learning, General Education, Higher Education, Institutional Support, Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), Community of Inquiry (CoI), Descriptive-Correlational Study, Educational ManagementAbstract
Anchored in the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), Community of Inquiry (CoI) Framework, and Constructivist Learning Theory, this quantitative descriptive-correlational study evaluated the effectiveness of the hybrid learning program in General Education courses at the University of Perpetual Help System DALTA–Calamba Campus during AY 2025–2026. Data gathered from 701 students and 21 teaching and non-teaching personnel through structured questionnaires were analyzed using weighted means and Spearman’s Rho correlation coefficient. Results indicated high overall satisfaction with institutional support among both students (M = 4.40) and staff (M = 3.71), particularly highlighting strengths in digital learning resources and academic assistance. Respondents perceived hybrid learning as highly beneficial for enhancing scheduling flexibility, content accessibility, and digital skill acquisition. However, significant implementation challenges persisted, most prominently unstable internet connectivity (students, M = 4.10; staff, M = 4.04), device hardware constraints, diminished social interaction, and self-discipline difficulties. Correlation analysis demonstrated a strong positive relationship between institutional support satisfaction and perceived program benefits, alongside a moderate relationship with perceived challenges. The findings confirm that while hybrid education serves as an adaptable and effective instructional model, its long-term viability depends on robust technical infrastructure, ongoing faculty training, and comprehensive student support mechanisms. Ultimately, the study presents the Hybrid Learning Sustainability Plan (HLSP) 2026–2027 to address identified gaps and optimize operational delivery.
Downloads
References
Alvarez, A. V. (2020). Learning from the problems and challenges in blended learning: Basis for faculty development and program enhancement. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 15(2), 112–124.
Anderson, T. (Ed.). (2008). The theory and practice of online learning (2nd ed.). Athabasca University Press.
Bates, T. (2019). Teaching in a digital age: Guidelines for designing teaching and learning (2nd ed.). Tony Bates Associates Ltd.
Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Schmid, R. F., Tamim, R., & Abrami, P. C. (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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-013-9077-3
Bervell, B., & Umar, I. N. (2018). Blended learning or face-to-face? Does tutor–learner interaction matter? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 15(1), Article 20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-018-0101-9
Bidarra, J., & Vitor, R. (2025). Problems and prospects of hybrid learning in higher education. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 40(3), 304–323.
Biggs, J. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education, 32(3), 347–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138871
Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university (4th ed.). Open University Press.
Bokolo, A., Jr., Kamaludin, A., Romli, A., Raffei, A. F. M., Phon, D. N. A. L. E., Abdullah, A., & Ming, G. L. (2022). Blended learning adoption and implementation in higher education: A theoretical and systematic review. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 27(3), 531–578. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-020-09477-z
CAST. (2018). Universal design for learning guidelines version 2.2. http://udlguidelines.cast.org
Castillo, F., & Biana, H. (2022). Teacher and student readiness in hybrid learning in the Philippine higher education context. Philippine Journal of Educational Technology, 5(2), 45–62.
Commission on Higher Education. (2020). Guidelines on the implementation of flexible learning (CMO No. 04, Series of 2020). https://ched.gov.ph
Commission on Higher Education. (2021). Flexible learning policy updates (CMO Series of 2021). https://ched.gov.ph
Commission on Higher Education. (2023). Updated guidelines on onsite learning in higher education (CMO No. 04, Series of 2023). https://ched.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/CMO-No.-4-s.-2023.pdf
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Dahlen, A., Charu, V., & Bhattacharya, J. (2023). Analysis of sampling bias in large health care claims databases. JAMA Network Open, 6(1), Article e2249804. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.49804
Darling-Hammond, L. (2014). Next generation assessment: Moving beyond the bubble test to support 21st century learning. Jossey-Bass.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
De Guzman, M., & Pascual, J. (2021). Experiences of college students under flexible learning in the new normal. Philippine Social Science Journal, 4(3), 112–122.
De Vera, J. P. E. (2021, May 27). Tertiary schools can be ‘creative’ in flexible learning [Press release]. Philippine News Agency. https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1141746
Dela Cruz, A., & Yazon, A. (2022). Hybrid learning and its effects on students’ academic performance. Batangas State University Research Journal, 10(1), 23–35.
Department of Education. (2021). Learning delivery modalities for school year 2021–2022. https://www.deped.gov.ph
Dziuban, C., Moskal, P., & Hartman, J. (2005). Higher education, blended learning, and the generations: Knowledge is power—No more. In J. Bourne & J. C. Moore (Eds.), Elements of quality online education: Engaging communities (pp. 88–100). Sloan Center for Online Education.
EDUCAUSE. (2020). 2020 EDUCAUSE Horizon Report: Teaching and learning edition. https://library.educause.edu/
EDUCAUSE. (2022). 2022 EDUCAUSE Horizon Report: Teaching and learning edition. https://library.educause.edu/
Fabula, J. B. (2023). Hybrid learning experiences of college students with special education needs. IAFOR Journal of Education, 11(2), 45–59.
Ferguson, R. (2012). Learning analytics: Drivers, developments and challenges. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 4(5–6), 304–317. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTEL.2012.051816
Fullan, M. (2016). The new meaning of educational change (5th ed.). Teachers College Press.
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2–3), 87–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6
Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001
Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2008). Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles, and guidelines. Jossey-Bass.
Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. (2011). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and applications (10th ed.). Pearson.
Graham, C. R. (2013). Emerging practice and research in blended learning. In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of distance education (3rd ed., pp. 333–350). Routledge.
Graham, C. R. (2019). Current research in blended learning. In M. G. Moore & W. C. Diehl (Eds.), Handbook of distance education (4th ed., pp. 173–192). Routledge.
Gudoniene, D., Staneviciene, E., Huet, I., Dickel, J., Dieng, D., Degroote, J., Rocio, V., Butkiene, R., & Casanova, D. (2025). Hybrid teaching and learning in higher education: A systematic literature review. Sustainability, 17(2), Article 756. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17020756
Hatcher, J. W., King-Corken, A., & DeVaney, T. (2022). The future of teaching and learning: Face-to-face, hybrid, and online instructional delivery models. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Cognition and Exploratory Learning in Digital Age (CELDA) (pp. 231–238). ERIC. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED626884.pdf
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
Hong, X., & Xiong, P. (2025). Self-efficacy for self-regulated learning and blended learning intention: Mediation analysis based on the technology acceptance model. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 53(9), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.13840
Kniffin, K. M., & Greenleaf, T. (2020). Group dynamics and collaborative learning outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 112(4), 780–792.
Kniffin, L. E., & Greenleaf, J. (2020). Hybrid teaching and learning in higher education: An appreciative inquiry. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 32(2), 161–172. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1411955.pdf
Koller, D., & Ng, A. (2012). The online revolution: Education for everyone. Communications of the ACM, 55(10), 28–30. https://doi.org/10.1145/2347736.2347746
Laurillard, D. (2012). Teaching as a design science: Building pedagogical patterns for learning and technology. Routledge.
López-Pérez, M. V., Pérez-López, M. C., & Rodríguez-Ariza, L. (2011). Blended learning in higher education: Students’ perceptions and their relation to outcomes. Computers & Education, 56(3), 818–826. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.10.023
Mazur, E. (1997). Peer instruction: A user’s manual. Prentice Hall.
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. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811311500307
Mulenga, R., & Shilongo, H. (2024). Hybrid and blended learning models: Innovations, challenges, and future directions in education. Acta Pedagogia Asiana Review, 4(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.53623/apga.v4i1.495
Muya, G. R., Basileyo, A. E., Calinao, R. J. G., Masa, J. R., Morandarte, S. L., & Zamora, F. (2025). Modelling hybrid teaching in the next normal for Philippine private higher education. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 26(3), Article 13. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1479087.pdf
Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572090
Nilson, L. B., & Goodson, L. A. (2018). Online teaching at its best: Merging instructional design with teaching and learning research. Jossey-Bass.
Niyomves, B., Kunacheva, N., & Sutadarat, S. (2024). Hybrid learning: A combination of face-to-face and online learning. Journal of Education and Learning Reviews, 1(3), 45–60. https://doi.org/10.60027/jelr.2024.673
Nobis, M. L., Jr. (2024). Blended learning in higher education: Unveiling student experiences in the new normal. SciEngg Journal, 14(1), 77–90.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2020). A framework to guide an education response to the COVID-19 pandemic of 2020. OECD Publishing.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2021). The state of school education: One year into the COVID pandemic. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/201dde84-en
Piaget, J. (1972). The psychology of the child. Basic Books.
Picciano, A. G. (2017). Theories and frameworks for online education: Seeking an integrated model. Online Learning, 21(3), 166–190. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v21i3.1225
Pine, E. J. M. (2025). A depth deficit: Rapport building and remote field instruction in university classes during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Experiential Education, 48(4), 767–797. https://doi.org/10.1177/10538259241285001
Qin, M. E., & Elhafian, M. H. (2023). The impact of sample size on the probability samples to estimate the total population number. Indian Journal of Science and Technology, 16(39), 3316–3324. https://doi.org/10.17485/IJST/v16i39.303
Republic Act No. 10173. (2012). Data Privacy Act of 2012. Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines. https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/2012/08/15/republic-act-no-10173/
Salac, R. A., & Kim, Y. S. (2020). A study on the internet connectivity in the Philippines: Problems and perspectives. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 11(4), 417–423. https://doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2020.0110454
Salayo, N., De Ocampo, A., & Santos, R. (2021). Flexible learning implementation in Philippine higher education: Opportunities and challenges. University of the Philippines Open University Research Bulletin, 9(1), 1–15.
Santiago, C. S., Jr. (2021). Flexible learning adaptabilities in the new normal: The Philippine experience. International Journal of Education and Research, 9(6), 123–134.
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.
Sevilla, C. G., Ochave, J. A., Punsalan, T. G., Regala, B. P., & Uriarte, G. G. (1992). Research methods. Rex Book Store.
Siemens, G., & Gašević, D. (2012). Guest editorial: Learning and knowledge analytics. Educational Technology & Society, 15(3), 1–2.
Stratton, S. J. (2023). Population sampling: Probability and non-probability techniques. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine, 38(2), 147–148. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049023X23000304
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4
UNESCO. (2020). Education in a post-COVID world: Nine ideas for public action. UNESCO Publishing.
UNESCO. (2021). Reimagining our futures together: A new social contract for education. UNESCO Publishing. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000379707
Ursua, M. A., & Dela Cruz, R. P. (2022). Validation of research instruments for hybrid learning assessment among tertiary students in the Philippines. Philippine Journal of Educational Studies, 14(2), 88–101.
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Warschauer, M. (2004). Technology and social inclusion: Rethinking the digital divide. MIT Press.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press.
Wiggins, G. (1998). Educative assessment: Designing assessments to inform and improve student performance. Jossey-Bass.
Wiggins, G. (2012). Seven keys to effective feedback. Educational Leadership, 70(1), 10–16.
Wiliam, D. (2011). Embedded formative assessment. Solution Tree Press.
World Bank. (2021). Remote learning during COVID-19: Lessons from low- and middle-income countries. World Bank Group.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15430421TIP4102_2
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
