Evaluating the Effectiveness of Online, In-Person, and Hybrid Learning: A Case Study of Engineering Disciplines at a Chinese Technical University
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v27i1.7996Keywords:
face-to-face learning, online learning, students, technical specialties, university, education, hybrid learningAbstract
The effectiveness of technical education may vary depending on the delivery method. This study compared the effects of online, face-to-face (F2F), and hybrid learning on engineering students’ academic performance. The study involved 450 second-year students pursuing an engineering degree at a technical university in China. The pre-test and post-test scores for the five core academic subjects (i.e., computer programming, further mathematics, physics, electrical engineering, and analytical mechanics) revealed a statistically significant improvement in academic performance across all subjects after use of hybrid learning (p < 0.000). The average gains were 3.46 points in computer programming, 4.07 points in further mathematics, 3.24 points in physics, 2.5 points in electrical engineering, and 3.06 points in analytical mechanics. The online and F2F delivery groups exhibited a statistically significant improvement with respect to scores for electrical engineering (p < 0.000) and physics (p < 0.002) only. The one-way ANOVA and Scheffe’s test results revealed that the hybrid model had the strongest learning effects compared to online and F2F. A SWOT analysis helped to further explore students’ perceptions of the three delivery formats. The present findings, which highlighted the effectiveness of hybrid learning, can be helpful in creating adaptive learning programs for engineering students.
References
Cramarenco, R. E., Burcă-Voicu, M. I., & Dabija, D. C. (2023). Student perceptions of online education and digital technologies during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review. Electronics, 12(2), 319. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics12020319
DeChenne-Peters, S. E., Sargent, E., Mateer, S. C., Machingura, M., Zettler, J., Ness, T., DeMars, G., Cannon, S., & BrofttBailey, J. (2022). Comparison of student outcomes in a course-based undergraduate research experience: Face-to-face, hybrid, and online delivery of a biology laboratory. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 16(1), 5. https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2022.160105
Demir, A., Maroof, L., Sabbah Khan, N. U., & Ali, B. J. (2021). The role of e-service quality in shaping online meeting platforms: A case study from higher education sector. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 13(5), 1436–1463. https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-08-2020-0253
DingTalk. (2023). DingTalk: Smart Work Platform. https://www.dingtalk.com/
Efgivia, M. G., Rinanda, R. A., Hidayat, A., Maulana, I., & Budiarjo, A. (2021). Analysis of constructivism learning theory. In 1st UMGESHIC international seminar on health, social science and humanities (pp. 208–212). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.211020.032
Farrell, O., & Brunton, J. (2020). A balancing act: A window into online student engagement experiences. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17(1), 25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-00199-x
Felder, R. M. (2021). STEM education: A tale of two paradigms. Journal of Food Science Education, 20(1), 8–15. https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4329.12219
Gherheș, V., Stoian, C. E., Fărcașiu, M. A., & Stanici, M. (2021). E-learning vs. face-to-face learning: Analyzing students’ preferences and behaviors. Sustainability, 13(8), 4381. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13084381
Haningsih, S., & Rohmi, P. (2022). The pattern of hybrid learning to maintain learning effectiveness at the higher education level post-COVID-19 pandemic. European Journal of Educational Research, 11(1), 243–257. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.11.1.243
Hayat, A. A., Shateri, K., Amini, M., & Shokrpour, N. (2020). Relationships between academic self-efficacy, learning-related emotions, and metacognitive learning strategies with academic performance in medical students: A structural equation model. BMC Medical Education, 20(1), 76. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-01995-9
Iatsyshyn, A. V., Kovach, V. O., Romanenko, Y. O., Deinega, I. I., Iatsyshyn, A. V., Popov, O. O., Kutsan, Y. G., Artemchuk, V. O., Burov, O. Y., & Lytvynova, S. H. (2020). Application of augmented reality technologies for preparation of specialists of new technological era. In A. E. Kiv & M. P. Shyshkina (Eds.), Augmented reality in education: Proceedings of the 2nd international workshop (pp. 181–200), Kryvyi Rih, Ukraine. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2547/paper14.pdf
Kadhim, J. Q., Aljazaery, I. A., & ALRikabi, H. T. S. (2023). Enhancement of online education in engineering college based on mobile wireless communication networks and IoT. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 18(1), 176–200. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v18i01.35987
Kashiramka, S., Sagar, M., Dubey, A. K., & Mehndiratta, A. (2021). Critical success factors for next generation technical education institutions. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 28(5), 1605–1621. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-06-2018-0176
Kaya, M., & Erdem, C. (2021). Students’ well-being and academic achievement: A meta-analysis study. Child Indicators Research, 14(5), 1743–1767. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-021-09821-4
Khamidjanovna, K. V., Nazarovna, S. S., Sattikhanovna, T. D., & Sabirzhanovna, A. G. (2022). Formation and improvement of word usage skills in the technical field. Journal of Positive School Psychology, 6(10), 4318–4322. https://mail.journalppw.com/index.php/jpsp/article/view/14495
Kruchkova, O., & Grigoriev, M. (2022). The introduction of innovative and active-based teaching methods into the complex process of acquiring professional competencies by students of technical specialties. In L. G. Chova, A. L. Martínez, & I. C. Torres (Eds.), Proceedings of 16th international technology, education and development conference (pp. 7958–7965). https://doi.org/10.21125/inted.2022.2005
Lewis, P. (2020). Developing technician skills for innovative industries: Theory, evidence from the UK life sciences industry, and policy implications. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 58(3), 617–643. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjir.12532
Li, Y.-D., Ding, G.-H., & Zhang, C.-Y. (2024). Effects of learner-centred education on academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Educational Studies, 50(3), 285–298. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2021.1940874
Lightner, C. A., & Lightner-Laws, C. A. (2024). A new day in higher ed: HyFlex universities. Interactive Learning Environments 32(10), 7364–7381. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2024.2312932
Lin, S., Lin, R., Sun, J., Wang, F., & Wu, W. (2021). Dynamically evaluating technological innovation efficiency of high-tech industry in China: Provincial, regional and industrial perspective. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 74, 100939. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2020.100939
Liu, M., Zhao, G., Zhong, Z., Ma, J., & Wang, W. (2024). Theoretical foundations for blended learning. In M. Li, X. Han, & J. Cheng (Eds.), Handbook of educational reform through blended learning (pp. 1–44). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-6269-3_1
Louis-Jean, J., & Cenat, K. (2020). Beyond the face-to-face learning: A contextual analysis. Pedagogical Research, 5(4), em0077. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/8466
Meshko, H. M., Habrusieva, N. V., & Kryskov, A. A. (2021). Research of professional responsibility of students of technical specialities by means of information and communication technologies. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1840(1), 012058. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1840/1/012058
Miller, A. L., Fassett, K. T., & Palmer, D. L. (2021). Achievement goal orientation: A predictor of student engagement in higher education. Motivation and Emotion, 45, 327–344. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-021-09881-7
Mohammad Shafi, M., Neyestani, M. R., Jafari, S. E. M., & Taghvaei, V. (2021). The quality improvement indicators of the curriculum at the technical and vocational higher education. International Journal of Instruction, 14(1), 65–84. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2021.1415a
Monge, C., Montalvo, D., Santos, F., & Torrego, J. C. (2023). Teaching innovation factors: Analysis from three Ibero-American countries. Educational Studies, 51(4), 482–502. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2023.2256920
MOOC China. (2023). MOOC China - Online Learning Platform. https://www.icourse163.org/
Nambiar, D. (2020). The impact of online learning during COVID-19: Students’ and teachers’ perspective. The International Journal of Indian Psychology, 8(2), 783–793. https://doi.org/10.25215/0802.094
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), 11–20. https://doi.org/10.60027/jelr.2024.673
Nurhasnah, N., Sepriyanti, N., & Kustati, M. (2024). Learning theories according to constructivism theory. Journal International Inspire Education Technology, 3(1), 19–30. https://doi.org/10.55849/jiiet.v3i1.577
Owston, R., York, D. N., Malhotra, T., & Sitthiworachart, J. (2020). Blended learning in STEM and non-STEM courses: How do student performance and perceptions compare? Online Learning, 24(3), 203–221. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v24i3.2151
Potra, S., Pugna, A., Pop, M. D., Negrea, R., & Dungan, L. (2021). Facing COVID-19 challenges: 1st-year students’ experience with the Romanian hybrid higher educational system. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(6), 3058. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18063058
Rafiola, R., Setyosari, P., Radjah, C., & Ramli, M. (2020). The effect of learning motivation, self-efficacy, and blended learning on students’ achievement in the Industrial Revolution 4.0. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 15(8), 71–82. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i08.12525
Reis, S. M., Westberg, K. L., Kulikowich, J. M., & Purcell, J. H. (2021). Curriculum compacting and achievement test scores: What does the research say? In J. Renzulli & S. M. Reis (Eds.), Reflections on gifted education (pp. 271–284). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003237693-15
Ren, W., & Ji, J. (2021). How do environmental regulation and technological innovation affect the sustainable development of marine economy: New evidence from China’s coastal provinces and cities. Marine Policy, 128, 104468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2021.104468
Sayfullayeva, D. A., Tosheva, N. M., Nematova, L. H., Zokirova, D. N., & Inoyatov, I. S. (2021). Methodology of using innovative technologies in technical institutions. Annals of the Romanian Society for Cell Biology, 25(4), 7505–7522. https://annalsofrscb.ro/index.php/journal/article/view/3397
Shadiev, R., Yi, S., & Altinay, F. (2024). Cultivating self-directed learning abilities in K–12 students through immersive online virtual tours. Interactive Learning Environments, 32(10), 7338–7363. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2024.2312923
Shen, F., Roccosalvo, J., Zhang, J., Tian, Y., & Yi, Y. (2023). Online technological STEM education project management. Education and Information Technologies, 28(10), 12715–12735. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11521-7
Singh, J., Evans, E., Reed, A., Karch, L., Qualey, K., Singh, L., & Wiersma, H. (2022). Online, hybrid, and face-to-face learning through the eyes of faculty, students, administrators, and instructional designers: Lessons learned and directions for the post-vaccine and post-pandemic/COVID-19 world. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 50(3), 301–326. https://doi.org/10.1177/00472395211063754
Singh, J., Steele, K., & Singh, L. (2021). Combining the best of online and face-to-face learning: Hybrid and blended learning approach for COVID-19, post vaccine, & post-pandemic world. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 50(2), 140–171. https://doi.org/10.1177/00472395211047865
Stevens, G. J., Bienz, T., Wali, N., Condie, J., & Schismenos, S. (2021). Online university education is the new normal: But is face-to-face better? Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 18(3), 278–297. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-08-2020-0181
Theobald, E. J., Hill, M. J., Tran, E., Agrawal, S., Arroyo, E. N., Behling, S., Chambwe, N., Cintrón, D. L., Cooper, J. D., Dunster, G., Grummer, J. A., Hennessey, K., Hsiao, J., Iranon, N., Jones II, L., Jordt, H., Keller, M., Lacey, M. E., Littlefield, . . . Freeman, S. (2020). Active learning narrows achievement gaps for underrepresented students in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(12), 6476–6483. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1916903117
Valieiev, R., Pokaichuk, Y., Zhbanchyk, A., Polyvaniuk, V., Nykyforova, O., & Nedria, K. (2021). In the search for the golden mean: Students satisfaction with face-to-face, blended and distance learning. Revista Romaneasca Pentru Educatie Multidimensionala, 13(1), 20–40. https://doi.org/10.18662/rrem/13.1/357
Wahas, Y. M. A., & Syed, A. J. A. (2024). E-assessment challenges during e-learning in higher education: A case study. Education and Information Technologies, 29, 14431–14450. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12421-0
Wang, T., & Bhagat, K. K. (2025). Theoretical foundations, models, and frameworks of blended learning. In Case studies on blended learning in higher education: Design, development, and delivery (pp. 19–40). Springer Nature Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-96-0722-8_2
Wu, T., Yang, S., & Tan, J. (2020). Impacts of government R&D subsidies on venture capital and renewable energy investment: An empirical study in China. Resources Policy, 68, 101715. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2020.101715
Zhang, L., Ma, X., Ock, Y. S., & Qing, L. (2022). Research on regional differences and influencing factors of Chinese industrial green technology innovation efficiency based on dagum gini coefficient decomposition. Land, 11(1), 122. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11010122
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. The copyright for all content published in IRRODL remains with the authors.
This copyright agreement and usage license ensure that the article is distributed as widely as possible and can be included in any scientific or scholarly archive.
You are free to
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms below:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
