67
THE EFFECTS OF BLENDED LEARNING APPROACH ON THE NEWTONIAN CONCEPTS OF SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS
Low Jie Ying1 Lee See Seng, PhD2
1SMK Seri Intan, Ipoh
2IPG Kampus Ipoh yingl.j@yes.my
Abstract
This study attempts to investigate the effectiveness of blended learning approach in teaching Newtonian Concepts with the usage of the Frog VLE involving 80 Form 3 secondary public school students in Ipoh. A quasi-experiment is conducted; the experimental group is exposed to face-to-face instruction in school supplemented by online learning via the Frog VLE. In contrast, the control group only experienced traditional face-to-face learning in school. A questionnaire of 45 items is administered to identify the dominant factors of the usage of blended learning on students’ learning achievement, motivation, collaboration and communication and the obstacles faced when using the Frog VLE. The findings showed that students who used the Frog VLE in the blended learning approach performed significantly better compared to the control group. The usage of the Frog VLE in blended learning has a high level of effectiveness related to students’ collaborations and communication followed by students’ motivation and students’ learning achievement). The main obstacle faced by the students is studying on the computer. There is no significant relationship between students’ attitude towards the usage of the Frog VLE and the obstacles faced.
Keywords:Blended learning, Frog virtual learning environment (Frog VLE), Newtonian Concepts, Force Inventory Concept (FCI) test
KESAN PEMBELAJARAN GABUNGAN TENTANG KONSEP NEWTONIAN DALAM KALANGAN PELAJAR SEKOLAH MENENGAH
Abstrak
Kajian ini bertujuan untuk mengkaji keberkesanan pendekatan pembelajaran gabungan dalam pengajaran Konsep Newtonian dengan penggunaan Frog VLE yang melibatkan 80 pelajar Tingkatan 3 sekolah menengah awam di Ipoh. Satu kajian kuasi-eksperimen dijalankan di mana kumpulan eksperimen didedahkan pembelajaran bersemuka dan diikuti dengan pembelajaran dalam talian melalui Frog VLE. Sebaliknya, kumpulan kawalan hanya mengalami pembelajaran tradisional bersemuka. Satu soal selidik 45 item ditadbir untuk mengenalpasti faktor-faktor dominan penggunaan pembelajaran gabungan (blended learning) yang meliputi pencapaian pembelajaran,
68
motivasi, kolaborasi dan komunikasi dan halangan yang dihadapi apabila menggunakan Frog VLE.
Dapatan kajian menunjukkan bahawa pelajar yang menggunakan Frog VLE dalam pembelajaran gabungan menunjukkan pencapaian jauh lebih baik berbanding dengan kumpulan kawalan.
Penggunaan Frog VLE dalam pembelajaran gabungan mempunyai tahap keberkesanan yang tinggi dalam domain kolaborasi dan komunikasi pelajar diikuti oleh motivasi dan pencapaian pembelajaran pelajar. Halangan utama yang dihadapi oleh pelajar adalah belajar di depan komputer. Tidak terdapat hubungan yang signifikan antara sikap pelajar terhadap penggunaan Frog VLE dan halangan-halangan yang dihadapi.
Kata kunci: Pembelajaran gabungan, Persekitaran pembelajaran maya Frog (Frog VLE), Konsep Newtonian, Ujian Force Inventory Concept (FCI)
INTRODUCTION
According to Yushau (2006), with the development of technology, the paradigm shifted towards education without barriers, no limitation of time and space and in another words, this is actually heading towards e-learning, distance learning or the well-known blended learning. In line with this, Ajide and Chan (2009) had proven that learning management system (LMS); Modular Object- Oriented Dynamic Learning Environment (Moodle) helped to execute blended learning, where both LMS and Moodle are different terms used for virtual learning environment (VLE).
Generally, blended learning is a teaching and learning process that encompassed two components, which involved traditional face-to-face instructions, where students meet up with their teachers in the classroom for daily basis, and online learning, where instructions are delivered through online activities (Yushau, 2006).
In order to equip Malaysian students with greater knowledge, higher-order thinking skills, performance skills and improve the quality of education, Ministry of Education of Malaysia had implemented a virtual learning environment (VLE) named the Frog VLE in primary and secondary schools. Many educators, teachers and parents are concern with the effects of this newly implemented blended learning approach delivered through the Frog VLE in both secondary and primary schools. Since blended learning had been proven to be able to enhance students’ learning and achievement in many past researches for different subjects, it is beneficial to investigate the effects of blended learning approach with the usage of the Frog VLE in Malaysia’s context in terms of students’ learning achievement. Based on the previous studies, the mastery level of Newtonian Concepts among Malaysian students were low Salmiza (2011), thus by examining students’ learning performance in the Newtonian Concepts with this blended learning approach would be able to fill
69
the gap of literature about effectiveness of blended learning in enhancing the learning process which lead to a better level of mastery in the concepts. Finally, it is hope that the findings of this study would be able to show the effects of blended learning supplemented with the Frog VLE for the Newtonian Concepts from the three aspects which are students’ learning achievement, learning motivation level and collaborative and communication. At the same, the obstacle faced by the students while using the Frog VLE will be identified as well.
Statement of Problem
In the middle of year 2012, Malaysians were being introduced with a new term, named the Frog VLE. The Frog VLE is actually a name given for a virtual learning environment adopted by the Malaysia. The Ministry of Education implemented the Frog VLE over 10 000 primary and secondary schools all over the country. With the introduction of this virtual learning platform, students are exposed to online learning where they could learn at their own pace in addition to the traditional face-to-face learning at schools. The combination of the usage of the Frog VLE with face-to-face session in traditional classroom is an example of blended learning approach.
According Hartman et. al (2010), blended learning is an approach which combined both face-to-face classroom instruction with online learning. In the context for this research, public schools in Malaysia are having conventional face-to-face classroom instruction as students are required to attend school daily for a fixed period of time. With the adoption of Frog VLE into the education system, students are exposed to a new learning approach, where students can learn online and some instructions are delivered online. In this situation, students have the control over their pace of learning as the Frog VLE can be access anytime, anywhere as long as there is internet access available.
Al Ani (2013) claimed that blended learning is a teaching approach which will be able to enhance students’ achievement and this claim is supported by the findings from the past researches as well (Ho, Nakamori, Ho & Lim, 2014). Lau, Lam and Zhou (2010) highlighted that blended learning was proven to be able to create a more integrated approach for both instructors and learners.
In Malaysia context, the adoption of the Frog VLE in both primary and secondary schools undeniable is a new approach and of course it will bring some changes in the teaching and learning process.
At the meantime, Kariotoglou, Spyrtou and Tselfes (2009) found out that students who are taught using the traditional method of teaching, most of them had a poor understanding of Newton’s Laws and the force concepts. Salmiza (2011) asserted that the same situation happened in Malaysia as majority of the researches conducted by local researchers had proven that most of the students in
70
the introductory physics courses were unable to master the Newtonian Concepts as well. Students in Malaysia are having problems in mastering the Newtonian Concepts taught in schools.
Based on the findings from the previous researches, it is believed that students in Malaysia are still facing difficulties in mastering the Newtonian Concepts. Since the purpose of implementing the Frog VLE in schools, is to aid the teaching and learning process at the same time providing a flexible learning mood to the students and encouraging collaborative learning among the students, hence it is worth to investigate the effectiveness of the Frog VLE in enhancing students in mastering the Newtonian Concepts. Therefore, this learning area of Newtonian Concepts is chosen to be investigated in this study. With the new blended learning teaching approach by embedding the Frog VLE as the learning software, will the students’ mastery level of the Newtonian Concepts be increased, is a good question to be pondered with.
Research Objectives
This study sought to explore this area where the purpose of this study is to investigate the effectiveness of blended learning approach in teaching Newtonian Concepts with the usage of the Frog VLE involving 80 Form 3 secondary school students a public secondary school in Ipoh. This study attempts to find out the effectiveness of implementing blended learning approach by embedding the Frog VLE on students’ learning achievements, motivation and collaboration and communication in learning Newtonian Concepts.
In line with this, this study strived to achieve the following objectives:
(i) To investigate to what extent the blended learning approach could determine students’
performance within a physics classroom which discusses about Newtonian Concepts with both face-to-face instructions together with the usage of the Frog VLE.
(ii) To examine the dominant factors of the Frog VLE that lead to students’ achievement.
(iii) To identify the obstacles faced while using the Frog VLE in the blended learning approach.
(iv) To know if there is any relationship between the blended learning approach using the Frog VLE and the obstacles faced.
Research Questions
This study intended to look into an evaluation of the effectiveness of blended learning in teaching the Newtonian Concepts in a secondary school by using the Frog VLE by answering the following questions:
(i) How does the students’ usage of the Frog VLE in learning the Newtonian Concepts influence their performance in Physics?
(ii) What are the dominant factors of the Frog VLE that lead to students’ achievement?
71
(iii) What are the obstacles faced by the students when using the Frog VLE in the blended learning approach to learn the Newtonian Concepts?
(iv) Are there any statistically significant relationships between students’ attitude towards the usage of the Frog VLE in the blended learning approach and the obstacles faced?
Hypothesis
In order to address research questions, there are three hypotheses for this study:
Ha1: There is significant difference between students’ usage of the Frog VLE in learning the Newtonian Concepts
Ha2: Students who used the Frog VLE in the blended learning approach performed significantly better in the FCI post-test compared to the FCI pre-test.
Ha3: There is significant relationship between students’ attitude towards the usage of the Frog VLE in the blended learning approach and the obstacles faced?
Significance of the Study
Malaysia implemented a virtual learning environment instead of a learning management system thus this study might raise the awareness among educationists, teachers, parents, students and the public about the benefits of blended learning and its effectiveness on students learning achievements. Apart of that, the findings of this study will be useful to teachers or instructors in order to decide whether or not to adopt blended learning approach in teaching other subjects. For those who would like to adopt blended learning approach with the implementation of the Frog VLE, the study will be able to assists them to monitor students’ achievement as the obstacles faced while using the Frog VLE are being identified in this study. Lastly, since this study involved the usage of the Frog VLE platform, it created an opportunities for the students to learn Physics collaboratively, where it encouraged the students to participate actively in the discussion board, sharing information with the peers and completing assignments.
LITERATURE REVIEW
With the emergence of e-learning or blended learning approach, studies related to these teaching approaches were conducted widely in both the UK and the US. Most of the studies conducted were carried out in the higher education institutions, investigating the impact, effectiveness and obstacles of blended learning approach for different disciplines either in form of quantitative studies or case studies.
Morris et. al (2006), claimed that VLE supported face-to-face learning for the subject of Biological Science in the University of Leeds where throughout this blended learning approach,
72
students were found to be more engaged and performed better in the final examination. Apart of that Teheѓan, Carriazo and Leόn (2010) had proven that blended learning enhanced the face-to-face learning process in the course Fundamental of Physics in the National University of Colombia as VLE fostered the communication between teacher and students as well as students and students.
Based on the past researches, blended learning had been proven to be effective in higher education institutions for different disciplines (Vaughan & Garrison, 2005). Meanwhile, VLEs are being implemented widely in higher education institutions as well and Minielli and Ferros (2005) added that VLEs managed to improve the quality of teaching and learning for both in and on-campus as well as distance education.
The conceptual model of the study is built based on the Community of Inquiry Framework (CoI) combined with the self-blend model.
Figure 1. Conceptual model
Figure 1 shows the conceptual model used in this study where the Frog VLE is embedded into the blended learning approach to enhance students’ learning achievement. When both VLE and blended learning combined together it would lead to students’ learning achievement, learning motivation, collaboration and communication. Under the roof of blended learning, the self-blend model is selected to be implemented in this study. Based on the literature review, most of the studies implemented self-blended learning supplemented by learning management system (LMS) or VLE and the findings showed positive effects on students’ learning achievement. Concurrently, VLE has been proven to foster the interaction among students and teachers and self-construction of knowledge thus it leads to the social and cognitive presence in the CoI framework (Lambert & Fisher, 2013).
Self-blend model consists of face-to-face instruction and online learning via VLE therefore, it leads to the teaching presence in the CoI framework. In another word, when the Frog VLE is used, it helps
The
FrogVLE Learning
Achievement
Learning Motivation
Learning collaboration and
communication Blended
Learning Supported
Self-blend Model
73
blended learning to take place and it is closely related to the CoI framework and it would bring effects to students’ learning achievement, learning motivation and learning collaboration and communication.
METHODOLOGY
Research Design
In this study, a non-equivalent control group, pre-test and post-test design was used to find out the effectiveness of blended learning approach in teaching Newtonian Concepts with the usage of the Frog VLE. Gribbons and Herman (1997) claimed that this research design is better than the non- equivalent group post-test only research design as it can partially eliminates the limitation of the post-test only design where the researchers can assess the difference between the groups.
The dependent variable for this study was the students’ academic performance in Physics which was measured by the post-test of the Force Concepts Inventory (FCI) test. The independent variable was the type of treatment given in each group. Meanwhile, the constant variables of this study were the students’ prior knowledge on Newtonian concepts, the number of hours of face-to- face instructions sessions for both experimental group and control group and the instructor.
Throughout the study, only one Physics teacher was involved for both face-to-face instructions and online instructions for both groups.
In the non-equivalent group design, comparison between the two groups was made where both groups were firstly given a pre-test, followed by the treatment, and then a post-test. The treatment was the usage of the Frog VLE as an enhancement of face-to-face lessons in school in the blended learning approach.
Sampling
This study was conducted in a public secondary school in Ipoh. This school is a daily school but it is a partial boarding school as there are at least two classes of boarding school students in each Forms. The selected sample for this study involved all the students from the three academic classes namely, Wisdom, Integrity and Noble. There were a total number of 80 male and female of Form 3 students involved in this study. The 80 students were non-boarding students and most of them scored at least grade B in both Science and Mathematics in the trial examination of Penilaian Menengah Rendah (PMR). Only a few of them scored grade C for either Science or Mathematics in the trial examination of PMR.
74
The rationale of choosing the academic classes was all the students met the minimum requirement to enter pure science classes when they were in Form 4 in the following year. The minimum requirement to enter pure science classes is that a particular student must score at least a C for both Science and Mathematics in the PMR examination. Concurrently, Form 3 students were chosen as the sample instead of Form 4 students because they were not exposed to any Newtonian Concepts yet when they studied Science subject in their Form 3 level. Newtonian Concepts only appeared in the Form 4 syllabus of Physics subject. Thus, the prior knowledge of the students could be constant variable in this study.
All the students from the three classes were put together and they were randomly assigned into the control groups and the experimental group. This will be able to ensure an unbiased sample population and at least it can make sure that the students in both groups are heterogeneous with mix ability (Research Methods Knowledge Base, 2012).
The control group and the experimental group were taught with the traditional instruction.
The two groups were instructed by the researcher. The researcher has seven years teaching experience in teaching Form 4 and Form 5 Physics. During the four-week period, each group received the same amount of instructional time conducted by the researcher in the same hall and each group was provided with the same materials and assignments. The language of instruction was bilingual while the language of the materials used for both groups and the language used in the Frog VLE was in English.
Research Instrument
According to Hestenes, Wells and Swackhamer, 1992 as cited by Cahyadi (2002), Force Concept Inventory (FCI) is a 30 multiple choice test which is specially developed to assess the students understanding of Newtonian Physics concepts.
Based on the research conducted by Savinainen and Scott (2002), it is proven that FCI is the most powerful tools in improving the learning and teaching of mechanics and it is the most reliable test for introductory physics teacher. However, the value of reliability and validity of Cronbach’s Alpha for FCI is not stated clearly. According to (Arkkelin, 2014), the findings of their study showed that FCI had high Kuder-Richardson reliability coefficient values, KR-20 > 0.8. This value showed that the FCI had a high internal consistency which proved that FCI is useful in measuring students’
mastery level of the Newtonian Concepts.
In order to address the research questions, the Force Concept Inventory (FCI) test was administered as the pre and post-test of this study. The FCI was administered as the pre-test before
75
students were exposed to the treatment and post-test was administered after the four weeks period in order to determine whether the usage of the Frog VLE would give an impact on the students’
understanding of Newtonian concepts. The FCI consists of 30 multiple-choice questions to measure the students’ understanding of Newton’s Law (Hestenes, Wells, and Swackhamer, 1992).
Apart of that, the questionnaire used in this study was adopted from the study of Al Ani (2013). It consisted of three main factors of students’ attitude towards the blended Physics course supported by the Frog VLE: learning achievement, learning motivation and students’ collaboration and communication learning skills as well as the obstacle faced while using the Frog VLE. Items in the questionnaire were in 5 point Likert scale ranging from “1=strongly disagree to 5=strongly agree”. The instruments in the questionnaire were validated by a group of specialists from the College of Education at the Sultan Qaboos University and it had a high reliability with the value of Cronbach-Alpha of 0.961 for all the items (Al-Ani, 2013). Thus, this survey is very reliable to be used in this study to address all the research questions and objectives.
Data Collection Procedure
The study was conducted over a four-week period. It involves a total of 80 students from the three academic classes, Wisdom, Integrity and Nobel. Throughout the experiment, the Newtonian conceptions were discussed. Both of the control group and experimental group had face-to-face Physics lessons in school once a week for a period of 3 hours. Both groups were instructed using the traditional Physics instruction, normal ‘chalk and talk’, where the lessons are mainly based in lecturing and no experiments were carried out. The teaching strategies rely solely on the teachers’
explanation and textbooks. Teacher structured the entire class, write notes, define the concepts, discuss about the concepts and pass out worksheets for students to complete. Teacher is responsible in transferring the knowledge as fact to the students and teacher performed the right way to solve problems. However, students were divided into groups to carry out some group works and activities.
The Frog VLE is an extension of the face-to-face lessons in school, where the experimental group was given a personal ID to login to the Frog VLE. Frog VLE is a platform which consists of audio, video, animation and text in a multimedia computer environment. In the Frog VLE, it provides a learning space to the students where the teachers upload notes, related videos and animations in the Frog VLE. Besides that, the students were given extra quizzes to be answered. There was a collection of problems where the students could try to answer them. Links to certain topic which students found it difficult during the classroom were provided by the teacher. Students in the experimental group could utilize the VLE at any time anywhere as long as they have internet access.
76
In order to prevent the students from the control group from accessing the Physics Frog VLE, the access of the VLE was restricted only to the students from the experimental group as login ID is needed. Students from the experimental group were not allowed to share their user ID with the control group as every student has their own VLE personal webpage. This Frog VLE personal webpage is personalised.
Pre-test and post-test were administered before and after the treatment to both the control and experimental group. Pre-test was administered to both groups before they receive any instruction about the Newtonian concepts. After the four-week period, a similar post-test will be administered to both groups. The pre-test results were compared with the post-test results where the students had completed the four-week period lessons using the VLE as an additional learning tool in learning the Newtonian concepts. For both of the pre-test and post-test, students from both groups would be given one hour to complete the tests.
In the second part of the study, a survey regarding students’ attitude towards the blended Physics course supported by the Frog VLE was administered to both control and experimental group to investigate the factors which lead to students’ learning achievement after the post-test. At the same time, the obstacles faced by the students were identified via the last section of the survey.
RESULT AND DATA ANALYSIS
There are 80 respondents in the study, 40 in each group. There are 16 male and 24 female in the experimental group and in contrast there are 14 male and 26 female in the control group. In both experimental and control group there are 23 respondents who scored A for Science in the PMR trial examination and the equal amount of respondents who scored B for the Science subject for both groups which 14 respondents and only 3 respondents from each group scored grade C in Science.
Majority of the respondents scored grade A for Mathematics in the PMR trial examination with 38 from the experimental group and 34 from the control group. None of the respondents scored C in the subject. There are 2 and 6 respondents who scored B in experimental and control group respectively.
The mean marks for the pre-test scores are 21.58% for experimental group and 20.33% for control group respectively. Both groups shared the similar mean value for the pre-test which indicates that both groups have the same level of prior knowledge where this indication is in line with the control variable fixed earlier in the study. Apart of that, the experimental group scored a better result in the post-test compared to the control group as the mean marks for the post-test in the experimental group is 50.92% and the mean marks for the control group is only 32.83%. Therefore,
77
it can be concluded that the experimental group performed better in the FCI test compared to the control group.
In order to answer the first research question on the difference between students’ usage of the Frog VLE in learning the Newtonian Concepts, an independent t-test is used and the result is as shown in Table 1.
Table 1
The Result of Independent t-test in testing difference between students’ usage of the Frog VLE and students’ performance in the FCI test
Levene's Test for Equality of Variances
t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed)
Pre Test Scores 100%
Equal variances assumed
.041 .840 .828 78 .410
Equal variances not assumed
.828 76.819 .410
Post Test Scores100%
Equal variances assumed
.843 .361 12.109 78 .000
Equal variances not assumed
12.109 77.586 .000
According to Arkkelin (2014), if the significant level for the Levene’s test for equality of variance is greater than 0.05, the variance between the two groups are considered as homogenous.
For the case in this study, the significant level for both pre-test and post-test, is greater than 0.05, 0.840 and 0.361 respectively thus the variance of both control and experimental groups are homogenous, thus the data of equal variance is used for data analysis.
The “t-value” and “Sig. (2-tailed)” are used to determine the difference between the students’
usage of the Frog VLE in learning the Newtonian Concepts. The t-value obtained from the pre-test is 0.828 with a p-value of 0.410 which is more than 0.05. Thus, there is no significant difference between the mean obtained by the control group and the experimental group in the pre-test. Whereas, the t-value obtained from the study for post-test is 12.109 with a significant level of 0.000 which is less than 0.05. Thus, there is a significant difference between the mean obtained by the control group and the experimental group in the post-test.
It is proven that the experimental group performed significantly different from to the control group where the experimental group’s mean of 50.92 is significantly better than the control’s group
78
mean of 32.83. In another word, students from the experimental group with the usage of the Frog VLE performed better in the post-test compared to the control group.
Hence, the conclusions for the research questions could be made:
There is a significant difference between students’ usage of the Frog VLE in learning the Newtonian Concepts. (t = 12.091, p < 0.05, df = 78).
In regards to find out whether students who use the Frog VLE in the experimental group would perform significantly better or not in the FCI post-test as compared to the FCI pre-test, a paired sample t-test is used. The result is as shown in Table 2.
Table 2
Paired sample mean pre-test and post-test (Experimental Group)
Mean N Std. Deviation
Pre Test Scores 100% 21.5835 40 6.31471
Post Test Scores100% 50.9162 40 6.91787
Paired sample t-test (Experimental Group)
Mean Std.
Deviation
t df Sig.(2-tailed)
Pre Test Scores 100% &
Post Test Scores100%
-29.33275 2.02599 -91.568 39 .000
Table 2 shows the FCI pre-test and post-test mean score which is 21.58 and 50.92 respectively with the standard deviation (SD= 6.31) and (SD =6.92) respectively with the sample of 40 students. The standard deviation (SD) shows that the post-test scores deviates more than the pre- test, 6.92 against 6.31 but the deviation is relatively small only 0.59 in difference. In the paired samples test as shown in Table 2, the “Sig. (2-tailed)” value is 0.000 (p < 0.05), this shows that there is a significant difference in the pre-test scores and post-test scores (p < 0.05, t = − 91.568; df = 39).
Based on the results above, it showed that students who used the Frog VLE in the blended learning approach performed significantly better in the FCI post-test compared to the FCI pre-test.
Therefore, a conclusion can be made: There is a significant difference in the performance of the students who used the Frog VLE in the blended learning approach in the FCI post-test as compared to the FCI pre-test (p < 0.05, t = − 91.568; df = 39) among the students in the experiment group.
In order to determine the factors which lead to students’ achievement when the Frog VLE is used throughout the study, the mean for each domain is calculated as shown in Table 3 below.
79 Table 3
Means and Standard Deviation of the Study Domains Study Group
Experimental group Control group Mean Std. Deviation Mean Std. Deviation Students’ Learning Achievement (LA) 3.925 .350 3.071 .483 Students’ Learning Motivation (LM) 4.014 .466 3.328 .845 Students’ Learning Collaboration and
Communication (SCC)
4.045 .349 3.341 .341
Based on Table 3, out of the three domains in this study, the highest mean for experimental group is students’ collaboration and communication (SCC) domain with mean value of 4.045 followed by the domain of students’ learning motivation, 4.014 and lastly is the domain of students’
learning achievement, 3.925. This shows that the most dominant factor of the usage of the Frog VLE that lead to students’ achievement is collaboration and communication domain. However for the control group, without the usage of the Frog VLE, the mean for all three domains ranged from 3.071 to 3.341. The highest mean is similar to the experimental group which is students’ collaborative and communication domain, 3.341 followed by students learning motivation with the mean value of 3.328 and learning achievement with mean value of 3.071.
In order to get a more detail analysis on the dominant factors of using the Frog VLE which lead to students’ achievement, each item from the three domains in the questionnaire is being analysed by calculating the mean and the findings.
From the finding, students explained that by using the Frog VLE, as in item 30, their skills in searching knowledge throughout web pages were fostered (4.425, the highest mean value among all the 11 items of SCC in the survey). In the Frog VLE, students were provided with a social platform (4.250, as in item 24 of SCC) where they could to chat with their peers out of lecture time in the learning platform (4.325, as in item 25) and get support and help from their peers in order to complete the learning activities (4.175, as in item 28). As for the control group, all the items in the SCC domain have the mean value between 2.975 to 3.825 which indicates that the students in the control group were uncertain with the usage of the Frog VLE in enhancing any collaboration and communication between peers or instructors.
From the findings of students’ learning motivation domain, students claimed that the blended learning approach using the Frog VLE managed to increase their desire in completing the assignments due to the animations and videos provided in the Frog VLE (4.525, as in item 23 of LM). At the same time, students felt fun learning through the Frog VLE as this item 17 of LM has the second highest mean value which is 4.050. As for the control group, the similar mean values
80
were obtained where all the students were uncertain with the usage of the Frog VLE towards their learning motivation. The mean value for each item fall within the range of not sure from 2.925 to 3.950 as students did not have the experience of using the Frog VLE in the traditional face-to-face learning.
However, from the students’ point of view, the usage of the Frog VLE in this blended learning approach is very helpful in developing their self-management skills as it shows the highest mean among all the others (4.425, as in item 9 of LA). Once the students have better self- management, this would lead to a better knowledge in Newtonian Concepts (4.350, as in item 7 of LA) as the Frog VLE enables the students to have more freedom in choosing the appropriate time to do their homework (4.350, as in item 13 of LA).
In the second part of the study, it attempted to investigate the obstacles faced by the students in the blended learning approach while using the Frog VLE. In order to identify the obstacles faced, each item in the questionnaire is analysed.
The major obstacle is identified which is students faced difficulties when they are required to study on the computer; this obstacle has the highest mean value (4.325). Students claimed that there is no technical support or guidance when they accessed the Frog VLE in the computer laboratory by themselves. This is the second major obstacle faced with mean value of 3.90. However, students did not encounter any problems related to computer skills (2.80), such as typing and editing skills (1.875). Besides that, most of the students have their personnel computer and pointed out that they could complete their homework via the Frog VLE in time, time constraint was not an obstacle (2.875).
In order to address the forth research question, to identify the relationship between students’
attitude in using the Frog VLE and the obstacles faced, a Pearson correlation test is conducted. The result of the correlation is as shown in Table 4.
81 Table 4
The Result of Pearson Correlation Coefficient to students’ attitude and obstacles faced with post- test scores as the control variable
Based on the results shown in Table 4, there is no statistically significant correlation between students’ attitude in using the Frog VLE from all the three domains (LA, LM and SCC) and the obstacles faced by the students even when the post-test scores are kept as the constant variable.
Similarly, there is a statistically significant correlation between the domain of LA and LM (r = 0.527) and between LA and SCC (r = 0.727) as the correlation is significant at the level 𝛼 = 0.01. Similarly, LM is statistically significant correlated with LA (r = 0.654).
Hence, the forth research question is addressed. There is no significant relationship between students’ attitude towards the usage of the Frog VLE in the blended learning approach and the obstacles faced by the students. The alternative hypothesis Ha3 is rejected.
To ensure the reliability of the instruments used in this study, a reliability test is conducted for all the instruments from the three domains, LA, LM and SCC as well as the instruments of the obstacles faced. The reliability result of the Crobach’s Alpha value for the instruments used in this study is 0.887 which shows a high coefficient. This indicates that the items in the questionnaire have high internal consistency with 0.899 Cronbach’s Alpha based on standardized items. According to Arkkelin (2014) for research studies, Crobach’s Alpha value must be more than 0.7 then only the instruments considered as acceptable to be used. Thus, the instruments used is this study are highly internal consistent and acceptable to be used.
Control Variables LA LM SCC Obstacle
Post Test Scores 100%
Learning Achievement (LA)
Correlation 1.000 .527 .727 -.168
Significance (2- tailed)
. .001 .000 .308
Learning
Motivation (LM)
Correlation .527 1.000 .654 -.100
Significance (2- tailed)
.001 . .000 .543
Collaboration and Communication (SCC)
Correlation .727 .654 1.000 -.078
Significance (2- tailed)
.000 .000 . .638
Obstacles Correlation -.168 -.100 -.078 1.000
Significance (2- tailed)
.308 .543 .638 .
82
FINDING AND DISCUSSION
Statistical result showed that, by embedding the Frog VLE into the blended learning approach to teach Newtonian Concepts has a positive effect on students’ performance in the FCI test. Students who learnt the Newtonian Concepts through traditional face-to-face learning in addition to online learning delivered via the Frog VLE out performed in the post-test of FCI compared to the control group. Therefore, it could be concluded that students’ usage of the Frog VLE in learning the Newtonian Concepts has a positive influence on their performance in Physics. There is significant relationship between students’ usage of the Frog VLE in learning the Newtonian Concepts.
This result is in line with those of Ajie and Chan (2008) where students’ performance is enhanced when blended learning approach is implemented in the studies of Material Science subject and Business Studies respectively. Similarly, in the study of Young (2008), blended learning approach is implemented in a Spanish course and students who were taught with both face-to-face instruction and online learning performed significantly better than the students who were taught with the traditional method.
This study attempted to determine the dominant factors that lead to students’ achievement when the Frog VLE is used throughout the study. The most dominant factors which lead to students’
achievement are those in the collaboration and communication (SCC) domain. The findings of the study showed that the domain of SCC is significant correlated to the domain of learning achievement (LA) where this is supported by the CoI framework. According to Garrison and Arbaugh (2007), when students acquired knowledge through interacting in a collaboration manner, it involved both the social presence and cognitive presence in the CoI framework. In another word, when students are engaged with the community in the online learning environment, their learning achievement would be increased.
The environment in the Frog VLE managed to foster collaboration and communication among the students as it could help them to gain knowledge through searching information via the webpages. At the same, in the social platform provided, students could chat and discuss with their peers about the learning area anytime. Furthermore, through the discussions, they could get support and help in decision making and indirectly their communication skills are developed. The findings are congruence with that of Bawaneh (2011) and Tseng (2014)
Bawaneh (2011) found that students who posted messages actively in the discussion board in the online environment performed better in the final examination as students learnt through the collaborative environment. This is supported by Tseng (2014) where in the online learning
83
environment students could still interact with each other after class and share their knowledge and thus students’ achievement is enhanced. Thus, the usage of the Frog VLE in the blended learning approach fostered collaborative learning among the students and the dominant factors which lead to students’ achievement is the collaborative and communication SCC domain.
Even though students are engaged in the interactive learning environment, yet the result of this study showed that students were uncertain with the usage of the Frog VLE in decreasing the gap between the peers. This could happen as in the Frog VLE; the discussions were mainly focused on the Newtonian Concepts instead of sharing stories and gossips among peers since the Frog VLE is meant for formal education.
Apart of that, in the learning motivation (LM) domain, students found that the usage of the Frog VLE increased their desire to complete their assignment as in the platform various resources are available and these increase their motivation to learn. This is parallel to the findings of Krishnan (2015) where in the online learning platform, a vast range of activities are provided such as videos, simulations, quizzes and all these make the learning process more interesting. The result of this study is supported by Geta and Olango (2016) who claimed that students are more motivated when they are exposed to a wide range of activities such as animations and videos since there are different learning styles among the students. At the same time, in the study of Aleksic (2013), students’
motivation was enhanced with the implementation of blended learning approach. In short, by providing different interesting resources to the students in the Frog VLE could enhance students’
learning motivation.
The findings of this study is in consistent with the results of Poon (2013) where blended learning approach allowed the students to take charge of their learning and students become more independent. Geta and Olango (2016) added that students become more responsible towards their own learning in the blended learning approach where they searched for related information themselves and developed new ideas from the information gained. Hence, with the usage of the Frog VLE in the blended learning approach students become active learners where they have better self- control and self-management.
Besides that, the major obstacle faced by the students while using the Frog VLE is the difficulties faced in learning at the computer screen. This could happen as the students in Malaysia usually have face-to-face learning sessions in schools, they are not used learn in front of the computer. Students did not face any obstacles in in using the computer, including computer skills, editing and typing skills as most of them are digital literate. The obstacle faced by the students in this study is relatively different from the other studies as in Malaysia, the online software, the Frog
84
VLE is provided to all the schools for free and students have unlimited access to the Frog VLE in school with the 4G network available. Unlike in the study of Aladejana (2008), students faced difficulty in learning where students have limited access of internet. Finally, there are no statistically significant relationship between the students’ attitude towards the usage of the Frog VLE and the obstacles faced. In another words, the obstacle faced by the students did not affect students’ attitude towards the usage of the Frog VLE.
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
Conclusion
It is clearly shown that the mean for pre-test scores in the FCI test is similar between experimental group and control group (21.58% and 20.33% respectively). In contrast, the mean for post-test scores in the FCI test for the experimental group (50.92%) is different from the control group (32.83%).
Experimental group out performed in the FCI post-test compared to the control group with a big difference in mean (18.09%). There is a significant difference in the mean of the post-test scores between students who used the Frog VLE in learning the Newtonian Concepts and the students who did not (t = 12.091, p < 0.05; df = 78). Additionally, students who used the Frog VLE in the blended learning approach performed significantly better in the FCI post-test compared to the pre-test (t = - 91.568, p < 0.05; df = 39). Moreover, the pre-test and post-test scores are significantly correlated (r
= 0.957, p < 0.05, N = 40).
The most dominant factor which leads to students’ achievement is the factors in the students’
collaboration and communication (SCC) domain (a mean value of 4.045 out of 5) followed by students’ learning motivation (LM) domain (mean value 4.014) and students learning achievement (LA) domain (mean value 3.925). In the SCC domain, students found that by using the Frog VLE, their knowledge of searching information through the web pages was enhance and this is the main factor which lead to their achievement. However, students were uncertain about the usage of Frog VLE in terms of enhancing their reflective thinking skills and decreasing the gap between peers even though they interacted in the social platform provided in the Frog VLE.
Suggestions
The blended learning approach implemented in this study was a combination of traditional face-to- face learning supported by online learning delivered through the Frog VLE in teaching the Newtonian Concepts. This study highlights the positive effects of blended learning in improving students’ performance, learning motivation, learning achievement and social and communication skills.
85
In the Frog VLE, an interactive learning environment is provided, where it fosters the interaction among students and teachers, this leads to the increases the social communication skills.
The results of the study demonstrated that blended learning approach develop students’ self- management skills and this lead to students-centered and active learning as to compared with the traditional face-to-face approach. Blended learning helps students to be more engage as the content delivered via the Frog VLE is more interesting and it makes the learning fun. Students have higher interest with the study area.
Thus, a better quality of education is provided with the blended learning approach. In essence, blended learning should be introduced to other teachers from different disciplines as to enhance the teaching and learning process. Teachers should be encouraged to make full use of the facilities provided by the government which is the Frog VLE in order to support the blended learning approach. Additionally, some courses on professional developments of teachers should be provided in order to give a clearer view of the implementation of blended learning approach with the usage of the Frog VLE.
Research Limitation
The study only took place in one of the public secondary school in Ipoh; hence the findings were only based on the practice in a single institution. The effects of blended learning approach with the adopting of the Frog VLE may differ from one institution to another. Since this study did not take place in the school which the research is currently teaching, one of the limitation faced was the period of time allowed to carry out in the selected public secondary school. The time allocated for the project to be carried out in the selected school was only a month time as permitted by the principal. The length of the project may have seems to be short in order to fully cover all the Newtonian Concepts with the students without any prior knowledge of the concepts. This may effects on the students’
performance in the FCI post-test as usually the course involving the Newtonian Concepts in higher education level would take up a year to be completed.
Research Implication
The positive effects of blended learning with the usage of the Frog VLE is in line with the objectives of Malaysia Education Blueprint which is to transform the students to active learners, develop their higher order thinking skills and social skills in order to face the challenges in the 21st century. Since the Frog VLE is newly implemented in both the secondary and primary schools in Malaysia, with the positive results obtained through this study, it could reduce the skepticism regarding the usefulness of the Frog VLE in the teaching and learning process. Lastly, the results of this study provide supporting evidence to move Malaysia traditional face-to-face teaching towards blended learning with the facilities provided by the government, the Frog VLE.
86 REFERENCES
Ajide, O. E., & Chan, C. T. (2009). A study on the effectiveness of blended learning. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference of Teaching and Learning (ICTL 2009) INTI University College, Malaysia.
Aladejana, F. (2008). Blended Learning and Improved Biology Teaching in the Nigerian Secondary Schools. World Congress on Engineering and Computer Science WCWCS. Retrieved from https:// www.researchgate.net/publication/44262348.
Al-Ani, W. T. (2013). Blended Learning Approach Using Moodle and Student’s Achievement at Sultan Qaboos University in Oman. Journal of Education and Learning; Vol. 2, No. 3;
2013.Pp96- 110. Retrieved from http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php /jel/article/viewFile/28509/17543
Aleksic, V. (2013). Blended Learning in Tertiary Education: A Case Study. Retrieved from http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1036/p96-Aleksic.pdf
Arkkelin, D. (2014) Using SPSS to Understand Research and Data Analysis. Valparaiso University ValpoScholar. Retrieved from
http://scholar.valpo.edu/cgi/viewcontent. cgi?article=1000&context=psych_oer
Bawaneh, S. S. (2011). The Effects of Blended Learning Approach on Students’ Performance:
Evidence from a Computerized Accounting Course. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Vol. 1 No. 6. Retrieved from http://www.ijhssnet.com/journals/
Vol._1_No._6;_June_2011/8.pdf
Cahyadi, V. (2002).The effects of interactive engagement teaching method to student understanding of introductory physics at the faculty of engineering, University of Surabaya, Indonesia.
Retrieved from http://
citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.99.3696&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Geta, M., & Olango, M. (2016). The impact of blended learning in developing students’ writing skills: Hawassa University in focus. African Educational Research Journal Vol. 4(2).
Retrieved from http://www.netjournals.org/pdf/AERJ/2016/2/16-022. pdf
Gribbons, B., and Herman, J. (1997). True and quasi-experimental designs. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 5(14). Retrieved from http://PAREonline.net/ getvn.asp?v=5&n=14.
Hartman, J., Moskal, P., Dziuban, C. (2007). Blended learning: A dangerous idea? Internet and Higher Education 18 (2013) 15–23. Retrieved from http://www.uws.edu.au/_
data/assets/pdf_file/0020/530336/
Hestenes, D., Wells, M., and Swackhamer, G. (1992). Force concept inventory. The Physics Teacher, (30), 141-158. Retrieved from http://modeling.asu.edu/R&E/FCI.PDF
Ho, V., Nakamori, Y., Ho, T., & Lim, C. (2014). Blended learning model on hands-on approach for in-service secondary school teachers: Combination of E-learning and face-to-face discussion.
Educ Inf Technol Education and Information Technologies, 21(1), 185-208. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/23645336
Lambert, J & Fisher, J. (2013). Community of Inquiry Framework: Establishing Community in an Online Course. Journal of Interactive Online Learning. 12(1), Retrieved from http://
www.ncolr.org/jiol/issues/pdf/12.1.1.pdf
87
Kariotoglou, P., Spyrtou, A. &Tselfes, V. (2009). How student teachers understand distance force interactions in different contexts. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education October 2009, 7(5), pp 851–873. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10763-008-9147-6
Krishnan, D. (2015). Effect of blended learning strategy on learning science among secondary school students. Retrieved from https://secure.hbese.tifr.res.in/ epi6/papers/Strand-3-main-talk s/epi6_P-32_Dhanya%20Krishnan.pdf.
Lau, N.S., Lam, L. & Zhou, B. (2010).Enhancing blended courses to facilitate student achievement of learning outcomes. International Conference on Hybrid Learning, 205-216. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007
Minielli, M. C. & Ferros, S. P. (2005). Electronic courseware in higher education. First Monday, Volume 10, Number 9. Retrieved 5 September 2005 from http://ojphi.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/1279/1199
Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2012). Preliminary Malaysia education blueprint executive summary (2013-2025). Kuala Lumpur: Author. Retrieved from http://www.moe.gov.my/
userfiles/file/PPP/Preliminary-Blueprint-Eng.pdf
Morris, M. L., Lim, D.H., & kupritz, V.W. (2006). “Online vs. Blended Learning: Differences in Instructional Outcomes and Learner Satisfaction”. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1306/1306.4085.pdf
Poon, J. (2013). Blended Learning: An Institutional Approach for Enhancing Students' Learning Experiences. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, Vol. 9, No. 2, Retrieved from http://jolt.merlot.org/vol9no2/poon_0613.htm
Research Methods Knowledge Base. (2012). Quasi-experimental design. Retrieved from http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/quasiexp.php
Salmiza, S. (2011). The effectiveness of the brain based teaching approach in enhanching scientific understanding of Newtonian physics among form four students. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education. Vol. 7, No. 1, January 2012, 107-122. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ972447.pdf
Savinainen, A., and Scott, P. (2002).The force concept inventory: A tool for monitoring studentlearning. IOP Publishing Ltd. 0031-9120/02/010045+08$30.00. Retrieved from www.iop.org/Journals/PhysEdhttp://cosm.georgiasouthern.edu/physics/ studiophysics/fci.pdf Teheran, P., Carriazo, J. G., & Leon, J. C. (2010). Blended learning applied to an introductory course on conceptual physics. ICL 2009 Proceedings - Page 1167. Retrieved from http://www.icl- conference.org/dl/proceedings/2009 program/pdf Contribution_152.pdf
Young, D. J. (2008). An Empirical Investigation of the Effects of Blended Learning on Student Outcomes in a Redesigned Intensive Spanish Cours. CALICO Journal, 26(1), p-p 160-181.
Retrieved from
https://journals.equinoxpub.com/index.php/CALICO/ article/viewFile/22875/18896
Yushau, B. (2006). The effects of blended e-learning on mathematics and computer attitudes in pre- calculus algebra. The Montana Mathematics Enthusiast, 3(2), 176-183. Retrieved from http://scholarworks.umt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1048&context=tme
88
Vaughan, N., & Garrison, D.R. (2005). Creating cognitive presence in a blended faculty development community. Internet and Higher Education, 8(1), 1-12. Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/765/1436
APPENDIX
Features of the Frog VLE
Online learning via the Frog VLE- Homepage of the learning site of Forces and Motion
Interaction between instructor and students through the wall
89 Online quizzes for self-evaluation
Notices are delivered via the notice board available in the Frog VLE
Discussion forum where students interact among peers and with instructor as well
90
Videos and animated online resources provided in the Frog VLE
