Integrating Hybrid Learning into the Higher Education System: Challenges and Opportunities

Hybrid learning technologies are increasingly being integrated into modern educational practices, eliciting both public concerns about the quality of education and positive feedback regarding the potential of digital learning environments in hybrid classrooms. This learning format acts as a catalyst for enhancing the quality of education and broadening access to educational programs. However, challenges such as student motivation in online settings and teachers’ readiness to use modern learning technologies persist. This research aims to analyze the advantages and disadvantages of hybrid learning. The study employs both theoretical and empirical methods. The theoretical component includes a comprehensive literature review on the topic. The empirical component involves (1) surveying higher education teachers and students about their perceptions of hybrid learning, (2) conducting classes in a hybrid format, and (3) comparing this format with traditional in-person and fully remote learning. The findings reveal that hybrid learning offers distinct advantages, particularly in organizing panel discussions, engaging students who cannot attend in person, and facilitating online programs, minor programs, and employee training. However, these benefits are more pronounced for administrative purposes than for teaching staff, many of whom express skepticism about the long-term effectiveness of hybrid technologies. Identified drawbacks include increased resistance from faculty during the adoption of new technologies, limited access to hybrid learning methodologies and resources, and the need for continuous technical support. Additionally, the study highlights specific challenges in using hybrid classrooms for foreign language instruction, which could be mitigated by increased investment in resolving technical issues. 

1. Abramova, M.O., Barannikov, K.A., Gruzdev, I.A., Zhikharev, D.A., Leshukov, O.V., Ott, M.A., Rogozin, D.M., Sandler, D.G., Sukhanova, E.A.,Terentyev, E.A., & Frumin, I.D. (2021). Kachestvo obrazovaniya v rossijskikh universitetakh: chto my ponyali v pandemiyu: Analiticheskiy doklad [Quality of Russian University Education: What We Understood in the Pandemic Period: Analytical Report]. Tomsk: Tomsk State University (in Russian).

2. Alammary, A., Sheard, J., & Carbone, A. (2014). Blended Learning in Higher Education: Three Different Design Approaches. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 30(4), 440– 454. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.693

3. Ananin, D.P., & Strikun, N.G. (2022). Gibridnoe obuchenie v strukture vysshego obrazovanija: mezhdu onlaijn i oflaijn [Hybrid Learning in Higher Education: Between Online and Offline]. Prepodavatel XXI vek [Russian Journal of Education], 4(1), 60–74 (in Russian). https://doi.org/10.31862/2073-9613-2022-4-60-74

4. Barannikov, K.A., Ananin, D.P., Strikun, N.G., Alkanova, O.N., & Bayzarov, A.Ye. (2023). Gibridnoe obuchenie: rossijskaya i zarubezhnaya praktika [Hybrid Learning: Russian and International Practice]. Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow, 2, 33–69 (in Russian). https://doi.org/10.17323/1814-9545-2023-2-33-69

5. Budhai, S.S., & Skipwith, K.B. (2017). Best Practices in Engaging Online Learners through Active and Experiential Learning Strategies. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315617503

6. Chiu, T.K. (2021). Applying the Self-Determination Theory (SDT) to Explain Student Engagement in Online Learning during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 54(s1), S14–S30. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2021.1891998

7. Curry, M.G. (2016). Does Course Format Impact Student Learning Outcomes? A CausalComparative Study of Online, Hybrid, and Face-to-Face Student Learning Outcomes in an Undergraduate Teacher Preparation Course [PhD Thesis, Wilmington Manor, DE: Wilmington University].

8. Driscoll, M. (2002). Blended Learning: Let’s Get Beyond the Hype. E-Learning, 3(3).

9. Erdoğdu, F., & Çakıroğlu, Ü. (2021). The Educational Power of Humor on Student Engagement in Online Learning Environments. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 16(1), 1–25.

10. Firth, J. (2020). Boosting Learning by Changing the Order and Timing of Classroom Tasks: Implications for Professional Practice. Journal of Education for Teaching, 47(1), 32–46. https:// doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2020.1829965

11. García-Morales, V.J., Garrido-Moreno, A., & Martín-Rojas, R. (2021). The Transformation of Higher Education after the COVID Disruption: Emerging Challenges in an Online Learning Scenario. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, Article 616059. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.616059

12. Garrison, D.R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended Learning: Uncovering Its Transformative Potential in Higher Education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001

13. Globa, A. (2022). Gibridnaya model’ dlya vovlecheniya studentov v prakticheskie onlajnzanyatiya [Hybrid Model for Tutorial Engagement]. Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow, 3, 7–35 (in Russian). https://doi.org/10.17323/1814-95452022-3-7-35

14. Globa, A., Beza, B.B., & Wang, R. (2022). Towards Multi-Sensory Design: Placemaking through Immersive Environments – Evaluation of the Approach. Expert Systems with Applications, 204, Article 117614. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2022.117614

15. Graham, Ch., & Dziuban, Ch. (2008). Blended Learning Environments. In J.M. Spector, M.D. Merrill, J. van Merriënboer & M.P. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technologies (pp. 269–276). New York: NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

16. Khan, B. (2005). Managing e-Learning Strategies: Design, Delivery, Implementation and Evaluation. Hershey, PA, USA: Idea Group Inc.

17. Koshti, P., Paryani, A., Talreja, J., & Zope, V. (2022, April 29). AttenQ – Attention Span Detection Tool for Online Learning [Paper presentation]. International Conference on Innovative Computing & Communication (ICICC) 2022. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4096416

18. Margulieux, L.E., McCracken, W.M., & Catrambone, R.A. (2016). Taxonomy to Define Courses that Mix Face-to-Face and Online Learning. Educational Research Review, 19, 104–118.

19. Radianti, J., Majchrzak, T.A., Fromm, J., & Wohlgenannt, I. (2020). A Systematic Review of Immersive Virtual Reality Applications for Higher Education: Design Elements, Lessons Learned, and Research Agenda. Computers & Education, 147, Article 103778. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103778

20. Raes, A., Detienne, L., Windey, I., & Depaepe, F. (2020). A Systematic Literature Review on Synchronous Hybrid Learning: Gaps Identified. Learning Environments Research, 23(4), 269– 290. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984019-09303-z

21. Ross, B., & Gage, K. (2006). Global Perspectives on Blended Learning: Insight from WebCT and Our Customers in Higher Education. In C.J. Bonk, C.R. Graham (Eds.), Handbook of Blended Learning: Global Perspectives, Local Designs (pp. 155–168). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.

22. Scaringella, L., Górska, A., Calderon, D., & Benitez, J. (2022). Should We Teach in Hybrid Mode or Fully Online? A Theory and Empirical Investigation on the Service-profit Chain in MBAs. Information & Management, 59(1), Article 103573. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2021.103573

23. Smith, G., & Kurthen, H. (2007). Front-Stage and Back-Stage in Hybrid E-learning Faceto-Face Courses. International Journal on E-Learning, 6(3), 455–474.

24. Sweetman, D. (2021). Making Virtual Learning Engaging and Interactive. FASEB bioAdvances, 3(1), 11–19. https://doi.org/10.1096/fba.2020-00084

25. Ulla, M.B., & Perales, W.F. (2022). Hybrid Teaching: Conceptualization through Practice for the Post COVID-19 Pandemic Education. Frontiers in Education, 7, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.924594

26. Vo, H.M., Zhu, C., & Diep, N.A. (2017). The Effect of Blended Learning on Student Performance at Course-Level in Higher Education: A Meta-Analysis. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 53, 17–28.