International Journal of

ADVANCED AND APPLIED SCIENCES

EISSN: 2313-3724, Print ISSN: 2313-626X

Frequency: 12

line decor
  
line decor

 Volume 12, Issue 11 (November 2025), Pages: 165-175

----------------------------------------------

 Original Research Paper

Designing blended learning platforms: A focus group study with educators

 Author(s): 

 Maryam Al. Washahi 1, *, Jaspaljeet Singh Dhillon 2, Rohaini Binti Ramli 2

 Affiliation(s):

  1General Foundation Program, Sohar University, Sohar, Oman
  2College of Computing and Informatics, Universiti Tenaga Nasional, Kajang, Malaysia

 Full text

    Full Text - PDF

 * Corresponding Author. 

   Corresponding author's ORCID profile:  https://orcid.org/0009-0001-7444-2982

 Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

  https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2025.11.016

 Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the use of digital technologies, such as blended learning (BL), in higher education. These technologies support educators in designing personalized learning experiences and help digital-native students prepare for future leadership roles. This study used focus group discussions (FGDs) with three groups of higher education educators to explore their views on BL in engineering education. The FGDs included open-ended questions focusing on the complexities and challenges of adopting BL and on how technology might help address these issues. The transcripts of the discussions were carefully read several times, coded, categorized, and analyzed to identify key themes. In addition, the participants’ facial expressions were observed and considered in the analysis. Based on the findings, a design framework was developed for creating an online learning platform in engineering education. The results show that integrating BL into education provides significant benefits for both educators and students.

 © 2025 The Authors. Published by IASE.

 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

 Keywords

 Blended learning, Higher education, Engineering education, Digital technologies, Online learning

 Article history

 Received 27 June 2025, Received in revised form 16 October 2025, Accepted 27 October 2025

 Acknowledgment

The authors would like to express their sincere appreciation to Sohar University and Universiti Tenaga Nasional for their continuous support and for providing the academic environment necessary for conducting this study. The authors also thank the educators who voluntarily participated in the focus group discussions and shared valuable insights that contributed to the development of the blended learning framework. 

 Compliance with ethical standards

 Ethical considerations

All participants were informed about the purpose of the study, and their voluntary participation was ensured. Informed consent was obtained prior to data collection. Participants were assured of the confidentiality and anonymity of their responses. No personal data was disclosed, and participation had no potential risks or harm to the respondents.

 Conflict of interest: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

 Citation:

 Al. Washahi M, Dhillon JS, and Ramli RB (2025). Designing blended learning platforms: A focus group study with educators. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 12(11): 165-175

  Permanent Link to this page

 Figures

  Fig. 1  Fig. 2  Fig. 3  Fig. 4 

 Tables

  Table 1 

----------------------------------------------   

 References (29)

  1. Abuhlfaia K and de Quincey E (2019). Evaluating the usability of an e-learning platform within higher education from a student perspective. In the Proceedings of the 2019 3rd International Conference on Education and E-Learning. Association for Computing Machinery, Barcelona, Spain: 1-7.  https://doi.org/10.1145/3371647.3371661    [Google Scholar]
  2. Alrabai F (2021). The influence of autonomy-supportive teaching on EFL students’ classroom autonomy: An experimental intervention. Frontiers in Psychology, 12: 728657.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.728657    [Google Scholar] PMid:34566814 PMCid:PMC8455827
  3. Arango-Vásquez SI and Manrique-Losada B (2022). Promoting communicative interactions in virtual environments: A methodological approach. In the XII International Conference on Virtual Campus (JICV), IEEE, Arequipa, Peru: 1-4.  https://doi.org/10.1109/JICV56113.2022.9934278    [Google Scholar]
  4. Arisandi SD, Selviandro N, Laksitowening KA, and Kusumo DS (2023). Performance analysis of virtual learning system: A case study of ANGKASA. In the 25th International Conference on Advanced Communication Technology (ICACT), IEEE, PyeongChang, Republic of Korea: 365-370.  https://doi.org/10.23919/ICACT56868.2023.10079602    [Google Scholar]
  5. Basitere M, Rzyankina E, and Le Roux P (2023). Reflection on experiences of first-year engineering students with blended flipped classroom online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic: A case study of the mathematics course in the extended curriculum program. Sustainability, 15(6): 5491.  https://doi.org/10.3390/su15065491    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bolu CA, Azeta J, Mallo SJ et al. (2020). Engineering students' virtual learning challenges during COVID-19 pandemic lockdown: A case study. In the IFEES World Engineering Education Forum-Global Engineering Deans Council (WEEF-GEDC), IEEE, Cape Town, South Africa: 1-5.  https://doi.org/10.1109/WEEF-GEDC49885.2020.9293681    [Google Scholar]
  7. Braun V and Clarke V (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2): 77-101.  https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa    [Google Scholar]
  8. Chuaphun P, Chuiai L, and Samanchuen T (2024). Developing a comprehensive virtual learning management framework: Key factors and strategies for success. In the 5th Technology Innovation Management and Engineering Science International Conference (TIMES-iCON), IEEE, Bangkok, Thailand: 1-5.  https://doi.org/10.1109/TIMES-iCON61890.2024.10630718    [Google Scholar]
  9. Cresswell JW (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. 3rd Edition, SAGE, Thousand Oaks, USA.    [Google Scholar]
  10. de Oliveira CD, de Mattos Fortes RP, and Barbosa EF (2020). Teaching-learning practices and methods for the elderly: Support for pedagogical and accessibility guidelines. In the IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), IEEE, Uppsala, Sweden: 1-8.  https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE44824.2020.9273974    [Google Scholar]
  11. Dumford AD and Miller AL (2018). Online learning in higher education: Exploring advantages and disadvantages for engagement. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 30: 452-465.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-018-9179-z    [Google Scholar]
  12. El Habti FE, Chrayah M, Bouzidi A, and Ali HA (2022). Blended learning platform model. In the XII International Conference on Virtual Campus (JICV), IEEE, Arequipa, Peru: 1-4.  https://doi.org/10.1109/JICV56113.2022.9934732    [Google Scholar]
  13. Faza A, Santoso HB, and Putra POH (2021). Challenges and opportunities of online learning implementation during the COVID-19 pandemic: Lecturers’ perspective. In the 4th International Conference on Information and Communications Technology (ICOIACT), IEEE, Yogyakarta, Indonesia: 59-64.  https://doi.org/10.1109/ICOIACT53268.2021.9564014    [Google Scholar]
  14. Graham CR and Halverson LR (2023). Blended learning research and practice. In: Zawacki-Richter O and Jung I (Eds.), Handbook of open, distance and digital education: 1-20. Springer Nature Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-0351-9_68-1    [Google Scholar]
  15. Hu P and Zhang J (2017). A pathway to learner autonomy: A self-determination theory perspective. Asia Pacific Education Review, 18: 147-157.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-016-9468-z    [Google Scholar]
  16. Lewohl JM (2023). Exploring student perceptions and use of face-to-face classes, technology-enhanced active learning, and online resources. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20: 48.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00416-3    [Google Scholar]
  17. LI X, Sulaiman NA, and Aziz AA (2024). A systematic review of blended learning in higher education: Second language acquisition through the community of inquiry framework. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 23(10): 226–251.  https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.23.10.11    [Google Scholar]
  18. Mavuso N and Jere N (2022). Blended learning approach: Students’ versus lecturers’ views from a South African rural university. In the 1st Zimbabwe Conference of Information and Communication Technologies (ZCICT), IEEE, Harare, Zimbabwe: 1-5.  https://doi.org/10.1109/ZCICT55726.2022.10045969    [Google Scholar]
  19. Mehrtash M, Ghalkhani K, and Singh I (2021). IoT-based experiential e-learning platform (EELP) for online and blended courses. In the International Symposium on Educational Technology (ISET), IEEE, Nagoya, Japan: 252-255.  https://doi.org/10.1109/ISET52350.2021.00060    [Google Scholar]
  20. Ochieng NT, Wilson K, Derrick CJ, and Mukherjee N (2018). The use of focus group discussion methodology: Insights from two decades of application in conservation. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 9: 20–32.  https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12860    [Google Scholar]
  21. Ong SS and Hawryszkiewycz I (2003). Towards personalised and collaborative learning management systems. In the Proceedings 3rd IEEE International Conference on Advanced Technologies, IEEE, Athens, Greece: 340-341.  https://doi.org/10.1109/ICALT.2003.1215113    [Google Scholar]
  22. Roopchund R (2022). Online and remote pedagogy: Technological innovations in an undergraduate chemical engineering module. In the IEEE IFEES World Engineering Education Forum-Global Engineering Deans Council (WEEF-GEDC), IEEE, Cape Town, South Africa: 1-6.  https://doi.org/10.1109/WEEF-GEDC54384.2022.9996230    [Google Scholar]
  23. Rossiter JA (2020). Blended learning in control engineering teaching; An example of good practice. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 53(2): 17252-17257.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2020.12.1797    [Google Scholar]
  24. Sala R, Maffei A, Pirola F et al. (2024). Blended learning in the engineering field: A systematic literature review. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 32: e22712.  https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22712    [Google Scholar]
  25. Sidi Y, Shamir-Inbal T, and Eshet-Alkalai Y (2023). From face-to-face to online: Teachers' perceived experiences in online distance teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic. Computers & Education, 201: 104831.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104831    [Google Scholar] PMid:37193045 PMCid:PMC10168189
  26. Stephen MR and Makoji-Stephen A (2023). Issues and challenges in the implementation of blended learning in higher education institutions (HEI’s) in Nigeria. International Journal of Public Administration and Management Research, 8(6): 42-50.    [Google Scholar]
  27. Thahir M, Widiawati W, and Baitillah N (2023). The post pandemic education: A blended learning approach for teaching and learning in higher education in new normal era. International Journal of Ethno-Sciences and Education Research, 3(3): 99-108.  https://doi.org/10.46336/ijeer.v3i3.461    [Google Scholar]
  28. Truss A and Anderson V (2023). The navigational challenges of a blended learning approach to teaching in business and management. The International Journal of Management Education, 21(1): 100733.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2022.100733    [Google Scholar]
  29. Wang JC and Wang TH (2023). Learning effectiveness of energy education in junior high schools: Implementation of action research and the predict–observe–explain model to STEM course. Heliyon, 9(3): e14058.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e14058    [Google Scholar] PMid:36915494 PMCid:PMC10006632