IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v12y2022i4p21582440221138448.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How to Decide the Proportion of Online to Face-to-Face Components of a Blended Course? A Delphi Study

Author

Listed:
  • Ali Saleh Alammary

Abstract

Deciding the proportion of online to face-to-face components of a blended learning course is a complex problem that entails many decisions. These decisions are affected by different criteria related to the nature of the course, the educational institution, the teacher, and the students. The impact of these influential criteria on the design process is not always obvious. The aim of this study is to assist academics to design successful blended courses by investigating the impact of criteria that need consideration when deciding the proportion of online components of a blended course. A modified Delphi survey was used in this study. Eighteen experts with experience in instructional design and online teaching participated in the study. Findings indicate that technological aspects, that is, Availability of technology and Students’ access to technology, have a strong negative impact on the proportion of online to face-to-face components. On the other hand, students’ flexibility and convenience as well as the availability of a high level of institutional support should motivate academics to incorporate a high proportion of online components in their courses. The results also indicate that blended learning courses should have medium to high proportions of online components.

Suggested Citation

  • Ali Saleh Alammary, 2022. "How to Decide the Proportion of Online to Face-to-Face Components of a Blended Course? A Delphi Study," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(4), pages 21582440221, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:12:y:2022:i:4:p:21582440221138448
    DOI: 10.1177/21582440221138448
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/21582440221138448
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/21582440221138448?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Xie, Shuyi & Dong, Shaohua & Chen, Yinuo & Peng, Yujie & Li, Xincai, 2021. "A novel risk evaluation method for fire and explosion accidents in oil depots using bow-tie analysis and risk matrix analysis method based on cloud model theory," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 215(C).
    2. Rowe, Gene & Wright, George, 1999. "The Delphi technique as a forecasting tool: issues and analysis," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 353-375, October.
    3. von der Gracht, Heiko A., 2012. "Consensus measurement in Delphi studies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 79(8), pages 1525-1536.
    4. Irina Kliziene & Grazina Taujanskiene & Aldona Augustiniene & Berita Simonaitiene & Gintautas Cibulskas, 2021. "The Impact of the Virtual Learning Platform EDUKA on the Academic Performance of Primary School Children," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-14, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Indra Abeysekera & Emily Sunga & Avelino Gonzales & Raul David, 2024. "The Effect of Cognitive Load on Learning Memory of Online Learning Accounting Students in the Philippines," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-21, February.
    2. Ali Saleh Alammary, 2024. "Blended Learning Delivery Methods for a Sustainable Learning Environment: A Delphi Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-17, April.
    3. Ali Saleh Alammary, 2024. "Optimizing Components Selection in Blended Learning: Toward Sustainable Students Engagement and Success," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(12), pages 1-30, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Prianto Budi Saptono & Gustofan Mahmud & Intan Pratiwi & Dwi Purwanto & Ismail Khozen & Muhamad Akbar Aditama & Siti Khodijah & Maria Eurelia Wayan & Rina Yuliastuty Asmara & Ferry Jie, 2023. "Development of Climate-Related Disclosure Indicators for Application in Indonesia: A Delphi Method Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-25, July.
    2. Di Zio, Simone & Bolzan, Mario & Marozzi, Marco, 2021. "Classification of Delphi outputs through robust ranking and fuzzy clustering for Delphi-based scenarios," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    3. Alyami, Saleh. H. & Rezgui, Yacine & Kwan, Alan, 2013. "Developing sustainable building assessment scheme for Saudi Arabia: Delphi consultation approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 43-54.
    4. Makkonen, Marika & Hujala, Teppo & Uusivuori, Jussi, 2016. "Policy experts' propensity to change their opinion along Delphi rounds," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 61-68.
    5. Mohammed, Sayeed & Desha, Cheryl & Goonetilleke, Ashantha, 2022. "Investigating low-carbon pathways for hydrocarbon-dependent rentier states: Economic transition in Qatar," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    6. Anca M. Hanea & Marissa F. McBride & Mark A. Burgman & Bonnie C. Wintle, 2018. "The Value of Performance Weights and Discussion in Aggregated Expert Judgments," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(9), pages 1781-1794, September.
    7. Kawamoto, Carlos Tadao & Wright, James Terence Coulter & Spers, Renata Giovinazzo & de Carvalho, Daniel Estima, 2019. "Can we make use of perception of questions' easiness in Delphi-like studies? Some results from an experiment with an alternative feedback," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 296-305.
    8. Sebastian Hinderer & Leif Brändle & Andreas Kuckertz, 2021. "Transition to a Sustainable Bioeconomy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-16, July.
    9. Barrios, Maite & Guilera, Georgina & Nuño, Laura & Gómez-Benito, Juana, 2021. "Consensus in the delphi method: What makes a decision change?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    10. Fritschy, Carolin & Spinler, Stefan, 2019. "The impact of autonomous trucks on business models in the automotive and logistics industry–a Delphi-based scenario study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    11. Gebhardt, Maximilian & Spieske, Alexander & Kopyto, Matthias & Birkel, Hendrik, 2022. "Increasing global supply chains’ resilience after the COVID-19 pandemic: Empirical results from a Delphi study," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 59-72.
    12. Förster, Bernadette, 2015. "Technology foresight for sustainable production in the German automotive supplier industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 237-248.
    13. Beiderbeck, Daniel & Evans, Nicolas & Frevel, Nicolas & Schmidt, Sascha L., 2023. "The impact of technology on the future of football – A global Delphi study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    14. Mohammed, Sayeed & Desha, Cheryl & Goonetilleke, Ashantha, 2023. "Investigating the potential of low-carbon pathways for hydrocarbon-dependent rentier states: Sociotechnical transition in Qatar," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    15. Ghazy, Shams & Tang, Yu Hoe & Mugumya, Kevin Luwemba & Wong, Jing Ying & Chan, Andy, 2022. "Future-proofing Klang Valley’s veins with REBET: A framework for directing transportation technologies towards infrastructure resilience," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    16. Pätäri, Satu & Tuppura, Anni & Toppinen, Anne & Korhonen, Jaana, 2016. "Global sustainability megaforces in shaping the future of the European pulp and paper industry towards a bioeconomy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 38-46.
    17. Menéndez-Caravaca, Eloísa & Bueno, Salvador & Gallego, M. Dolores, 2021. "Exploring the link between free and open source software and the collaborative economy: A Delphi-based scenario for the year 2025," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    18. Meissner, Philip & Brands, Christian & Wulf, Torsten, 2017. "Quantifiying blind spots and weak signals in executive judgment: A structured integration of expert judgment into the scenario development process," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 244-253.
    19. Tobias Meyer & Heiko A. von der Gracht & Evi Hartmann, 2022. "Technology foresight for sustainable road freight transportation: Insights from a global real‐time Delphi study," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 4(1), March.
    20. Volkmar, Gioia & Fischer, Peter M. & Reinecke, Sven, 2022. "Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning: Exploring drivers, barriers, and future developments in marketing management," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 599-614.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:12:y:2022:i:4:p:21582440221138448. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.