Learning in a Hybrid Classroom Environment: Students’ Opinions and Preferences
Le résumé fourni par la source
Background/purpose. This study aims to determine the preferences and opinions of University of Sharjah students about hybrid learning, taking into account its increasing use globally, especially during and after the pandemic. Materials/methods. Participants were invited to complete a voluntary web-based questionnaire (Google Form), which was distributed online during the second semester of the 2023–2024 academic year. The initial sample included 450 UOS students. However, only 400 completed the questionnaire, leading to a response rate of 89%. Descriptive analysis and multiple regressions were conducted on data collected from 400 undergraduate students from different majors at the University of Sharjah. Participants had to voluntarily answer an online self-survey questionnaire. Results. The results revealed positive and negative opinions of students regarding hybrid learning, indicating that although students preferred face-to-face and hybrid learning, they had a stronger preference for face-to-face education, especially when it requires direct interaction, as well as during assessments. The results reflect a clear influence of specialization and year of study, as well as place and type of residence on students’ preferences and opinions. Conclusion. The results indicate the need to improve hybrid learning by addressing communication and direct interaction issues, activating the human element in the learning process, and improving the level of technology training for teachers and learners.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Learning in a Hybrid Classroom Environment: Students’ Opinions and Preferences
- Date Crossref
- 01/01/2025
- Éditeur
- Universitepark
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.