Document Type : Original Article
Authors
- . Narasimman Swaminathan
- . Latha Ravichandran 1
- . Sivakumar Ramachandran 2
- . Steve Milanese 3
- . Rajeswari Singaravelu 4
- . Pitchaimani Govindaraj 5
1 Centre for Health Professionals Education and Department of Paediatrics, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
2 Faculty of Physiotherapy, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
3 Allied Health and Human Performance, School of Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia
4 Faculty of Nursing, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
5 Department of Allied Health Sciences, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Blended learning (BL), the integration of online with face to face teaching, is
established as a teaching method in higher education. Understanding the learner’s readiness
toward online component of BL is important in designing and delivering BL. Nursing students require
proficiency in interpersonal relationship and social interaction apart from knowledge and skills. BL
may provide an opportunity to acquire the professional skills better than the traditional face to face
sessions. The objectives of this study were to identify the nursing student’s readiness toward BL
and perceptions about the online learning component of BL.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: First‑ and second‑year entry level graduate nursing students of Sri
Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education, Chennai, India, were the participants of the study. This
study used a mixed method approach. An online questionnaire, developed based on the literature
and expert consensus, was used in the first phase. A focus group discussion (FGD) with ten random
participants of the survey was conducted to understand the perceptions and readiness to adopt the online
component of BL. The present study was conducted from December 2019 to January 2020. Survey
results were analyzed through descriptively. Content analysis was carried to summarize FGD results.
RESULTS: A total 158 students of entry level nursing graduate programme participated in the survey.
53.8% of felt BL will have positive effect on their learning and 70% of the respondents were ready
to adopt BL. The FGD identified two themes: (I) Readiness to adopt online learning as a component
of BL and (II) perceived barriers and challenges in adopting online contents.
CONCLUSION: Entry level nursing graduate students had a positive perception about the online
components. Majority of them are confident in accessing the online contents. Willingness to learn
through online, previous experience with online learning, and perceived advantages of online
component might influence the learner’s readiness. Availability of internet and absence of teachers
were perceived as the barriers to online learning by the participants.
Keywords
Horizon MCB University Press, UK; 20019(5).
2. Blissitt AM. Blended learning versus traditional lecture in
introductory nursing pathophysiology courses. J Nurs Educ
2016;55:227‑30.
3. Milanese SF, Grimmer‑Somers K, Souvlis T, Innes‑Walker K,
Chipchase LS. Is a blended learning approach effective
for learning in allied health clinicians? Phys Ther Rev
2013;19:86‑93.
4. Smyth S, Houghton C, Cooney A, Casey D. Students’ experiences
of blended learning across a range of postgraduate programmes.
Nurse Educ Today 2012;32:464‑8.
5. Mary S, Julie J, Jennifer G. Teaching evidence based practice and
research through blended learning to undergraduate midwifery
students from a practice based perspective. Nurse Educ Pract
2014;14:220‑4.
6. Zacharis NZ. The impact of learning styles on student achievement
in a web‑based versus an equivalent face‑to‑face course. Coll Stud
J 2010;44:591‑7.
7. McCutcheon K, Lohan M, Traynor M, Martin D. A systematic
review evaluating the impact of online or blended learning vs.
face‑to‑face learning of clinical skills in undergraduate nurse
education. J Adv Nurs 2015;71:255‑70.
8. Coyne E, Rands H, Frommolt V, Kain V, Plugge M, Mitchell M.
Investigation of blended learning video resources to teach health
students clinical skills: An integrative review. Nurse Educ Today
2018;63:101‑7.
9. Parandavar N, Rezaee R, Mosallanejad L, Mosallanejad Z.
Designing a blended training program and its effects on clinical
practice and clinical reasoning in midwifery students. J Educ
Health Promot 2019;8:131.
10. Garrison DR, Kanuka H. Blended learning: Uncovering its
transformative potential in higher education. Internet High Educ
2004;7:95‑1057 .
11. Okaz AAIntegrating blended learning in higher education.
Procedia‑Soc Behav Sci 2015;13:600‑3.
12. Swaminathan N, Ravichandran L, Ramachandran S, Milanese S.
Blended learning and health professional education: Protocol
for a mixed‑method systematic review. J Educ Health Promot
2020;9:46.
13. McCutcheon K, O’Halloran P, Lohan M. Online learning versus
blended learning of clinical supervisee skills with pre‑registration
nursing students: A randomised controlled trial. Int J Nurs Stud
2018;82:30‑9.
14. Posey L, Pintz C. Transitioning a bachelor of science in nursing program to blended learning: Successes, challenges & outcomes.
Nurse Educ Pract 2017;26:126‑33.
15. Davidson SC, MetzgerR, Lindgren KS. A hybrid classroom‑online
curriculum format for RN‑BSN students: Cohort support and
curriculum structure improve graduation rates. J Contin Educ
Nurs 2011;42:223‑32.
16. Smith PJ, Murphy KL, Mahoney SE. Towards identifying factors
underlying readiness for online learning: An exploratory study.
Distance Educ 2010;24:57‑67.
17. Engin M. Analysis of students’ online learning readiness based on
their emotional intelligence level. Univers J Educ Res 2017;5:32‑40.
18. Wang SL, Lin SS. The application of social cognitive theory
to web‑based learning through NetPorts. Br J Educ Techno
2007;38:600‑12.
19. BanduraA. Social Foundations of Thought and Action. Englewood
Cliffs, N. J: A Social Cognitive Theory Prentice‑Hall; 1986.
20. Ngan OM, Tang TL, Chan AK, Chen DM, Tang MK. Blended
learning in anatomy teaching for non‑medical students: An
innovative approach to the health professions education. Health
Prof Educ 2018;4:149‑58.
21. Balaraman TS, Swaminathan N, Śliwiński Z, Kiljański M. Blended
learning in physiotherapy education: Magic mix that improves
quality of student learning. Fizjoterapia Polska 2016;4:24‑8.
22. Linjawi AI, Alfadda LS. Students’ perception, attitudes, and
readiness toward online learning in dental education in Saudi
Arabia: A cohort study. Adv Med Educ Pract 2018;9:855‑63.
23. Linjawi AL, Hamdan AM, Perryer DG, Walmsley AD, Hill KB.
Students’ attitudes towards an on‑line orthodontic learning
resource. Eur J Dent Educ 2009;13:87‑92.
24. Borotis S, Poulymenakou A. E‑learning readiness components:
Key issues to consider before adopting e‑learning interventions.
In: Nall J, Robson R, editors. E‑Learn: World Conference on
E‑Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher
Education 2004; Washington, DC, USA: Association for the
Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE); 2004.
p. 1622‑9.
25. Yu T, Richardson CJ. An exploratory factor analysis and reliability
analysis student online readiness instrument (SOLR). Online
Learn 2015;19:120‑41.
26. Warner D, Christie G, Choy S. Australian National Training A.
The Readiness of the VET Sector for Flexible Delivery Including
on‑Line Learning: A Guide for Developers of Curriculum and
Training Packages; 1998.
27. Lohnes Watulak S. ‘I’m not a computer person’: Negotiating
participation in academic Discourses. Br J Educ Technol
2012;43:109‑18.
28. Kliger D, Pfeiffer E. Engaging students in blended courses through
increased technology. J Physl Ther Educ 2011;25:11‑4.
)