Blended Learning; Models for Transforming Instructional Practice

International Journal on Integrating Technology in Education (IJITE) Vol.14, No.2, June 2025
DOI:10.5121/ijite.2025.14202 17
BLENDED LEARNING; MODELS FOR
TRANSFORMING INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICE
Beatrice N. Manyasi
School of Education, Maasai Mara University – Kenya
ABSTRACT
Blended learning, defined as the deliberate combination of face-to-face and online instructional methods,
has emerged as a pivotal strategy for enhancing educational effectiveness in diverse contexts. This paper
undertakes a systematic literature review to examine prevailing blended learning models and assess their
effectiveness within instructional settings, with a particular focus on the Kenyan education system. Using a
structured methodology guided by clearly defined inclusion and exclusion criteria, peer-reviewed studies
and credible reports published between 2010 and 2025 were sourced from academic databases including
ERIC, Science Direct, JSTOR, Google Scholar and African Journals Online. The review identifies several
dominant models such as the flipped classroom, rotation models, and enriched virtual models highlighting
their pedagogical underpinnings and operational characteristics. Findings reveal that while blended
learning offers significant benefits in terms of personalization, flexibility, and learner engagement, its
implementation in Kenya is constrained by infrastructural deficiencies, limited digital literacy, and socio-
economic disparities. The paper discusses strategies to mitigate these challenges, including investments in
digital infrastructure, targeted professional development for educators, and policy frameworks that
support sustainable integration of technology in pedagogy. The study concludes by emphasizing that the
strategic adoption of contextually appropriate blended learning models is critical to advancing effective
instruction and achieving equitable educational outcomes.
KEYWORDS
Blended Learning, Synchronous Learning, Asynchronous Learning, Hybrid Learning, Blended Learning
Models, Instructional Practice
1. INTRODUCTION
In recent years, the landscape of education has undergone a significant transformation, largely
driven by advancements in technology and the increasing demand for more flexible, student-
centered learning experiences. Among the most impactful innovations are blended learning
models, which strategically integrate online digital media with traditional classroom methods.
Blended learning allows students to benefit from both the personalization and flexibility of online
instruction and the social interaction and mentorship of face-to-face learning. Recognizing the
potential of technology to enhance educational access and quality, the United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) has consistently advocated for the
integration of digital learning tools to promote inclusive, equitable, and high-quality education
for all learners (UNESCO, 2023) and (Alammary, 2022). This study focuses on four prominent
blended learning models: The Enriched Virtual Model, Lab Rotation Model, Individual Rotation
Model, and Online Driver Model. Each model offers unique structures for combining online and
offline learning, and each responds differently to students' needs for flexibility, personalization,
and support (Picciano, 2023). While these models have shown promise in various educational
contexts, there remains a need for deeper exploration into their comparative effectiveness, the
challenges faced in their implementation, and the evolving role of teachers within these hybrid

18
environments (Graham, et al 2023). By investigating these blended learning models, the study
aims to contribute to the global dialogue on best practices in modern education. It seeks to align
with UNESCO’s vision of leveraging innovative pedagogical strategies to close educational gaps,
improve learning outcomes, and prepare students for the demands of a rapidly changing world.
Through this research, the study will offer insights and recommendations for policymakers,
school leaders, and educators committed to advancing quality education through blended learning
approaches.
The main difference between a physical environment and a virtual environment lies in the way in
which they are experienced. A physical environment refers to a tangible, real-world space that we
can see, touch, and interact with physically, such as a classroom, office, or outdoor setting. In
contrast, a virtual environment exists in a digital space created through technology, such as
virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), or online platforms. In a physical environment,
interactions occur in person, allowing for face-to-face communication, hands-on activities, and a
sense of presence that is often lacking in virtual environments. Physical environments provide
sensory experiences that engage all five senses and promote a sense of connection and shared
experience among individuals. On the other hand, virtual environments offer unique
opportunities for immersive experiences, simulations, and interactions that may not be possible in
a physical setting. Virtual environments can transcend physical limitations, allowing users to
explore new worlds, manipulate objects digitally, and collaborate with others remotely in real-
time. While physical environments offer a sense of authenticity and immediacy, virtual
environments provide flexibility, scalability, and accessibility that can cater to diverse learning
styles and preferences (Ferdig, & Pytash, 2024).
As technology continues to evolve and impacts all aspects of our daily lives, learning and
education of these new technologies cannot be overlooked. It’s important to remember that
“evolving” refers to moving ahead to the next level without decimating the old, i.e. taking
advantage of both the worlds the positives of old with the advantages of new.
In the case of education, this is known as blended learning. The concept of blended learning has
gained great popularity over the last few years, with its advantages being lauded by learning
professionals. Blended learning combines the benefits of traditional classroom teaching with
emerging technology to make learning more real-time, contextual, and engaging. Let’s delve
deeper into what blended learning and is, and highlight different models and benefits it offers to
the contemporary educational setting.
2. METHODOLOGY
This study adopted a systematic literature review (SLR) as the primary research methodology to
explore the role of blended learning models in transforming instructional practice. Systematic
reviews are characterized by their structured, replicable, and transparent procedures for
identifying, evaluating, and synthesizing existing studies, making them especially suited to
examining broad educational trends (Gough, Oliver, & Thomas, 2017; Snyder, 2019).
The review was guided by the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and
Meta-Analyses) framework to ensure methodological rigor and transparency (Page et al., 2021).
The central research questions focused on: identifying the most commonly implemented blended
learning models; examining how these models influence instructional strategies and teacher roles;
and exploring the challenges and success factors associated with their implementation. A
comprehensive literature search was conducted using five major databases: ERIC, Scopus, Web
of Science, JSTOR, and Google Scholar. Search terms included combinations such as “blended
learning models,” “instructional transformation,” “flipped classroom,” “station rotation,” “flex

19
model,” and “pedagogical change.” Boolean operators and filters were applied to refine the
search results. The inclusion criteria encompassed peer-reviewed empirical studies published
between 2010 and 2025, focusing on primary, secondary, tertiary, or professional education
settings, and reporting on the impact of blended learning on instructional practices. Grey
literature, such as dissertations and conference papers, was also reviewed when it offered
empirical insights. Studies that focused exclusively on either traditional or fully online modalities
were excluded. The screening process involved two stages: an initial review of titles and
abstracts, followed by full-text analysis of potentially relevant studies. The selection process was
documented using a PRISMA flow diagram, in line with established best practices. A total of 20
studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis. Data extraction was
carried out using a structured coding matrix. Key information collected included authorship, year
of publication, educational context, type of blended model used, observed changes in
instructional strategies, and reported challenges or successes. The data were then analyzed
thematically using a combination of inductive and deductive coding approaches. Emerging
themes included redefined teacher roles, shifts toward student-centered pedagogy, increased
integration of digital tools, and variations in implementation outcomes based on institutional
support and teacher preparedness (e.g., Graham et al., 2019; Smith & Johnson, 2021).
3. LITERATURE REVIEW
3.1. Blended Learning and Hybrid Learning
Blended learning is an educational approach that combines traditional classroom learning with
online learning. It is a flexible and adaptable approach that considers different learning styles and
preferences. It allows for a mix of face-to-face interaction with teachers and peers, as well as self-
paced online study (Ndwiga, et al 2024). This approach can be very effective in catering to
different learning styles and preferences, as well as providing flexibility and accessibility for
students. It often includes a variety of multimedia resources, interactive activities, and
opportunities for collaboration. In blended learning, the goal is to create a single, unified learning
experience that mixes classroom time with online activities. For example, imagine a biology class
where students attend lectures in person twice a week. After each lecture, they log into an online
platform at home to complete simulations of cell division or participate in online discussions
about genetics. The face-to-face lessons and the online work are interconnected, designed to
support each other. In blended learning, students are usually required to attend their in-person
classes regularly the online work enhances but does not replace classroom time as presented in
Figure 1.
Figure 1: Blended learning

20
Essentially, blended learning can enhance the learning experience and help students achieve their
educational goals in a more personalized and engaging way. As observed earlier, in a blended
learning setup, students do not only rely on in-person lessons; they also engage in learning
experiences outside the classroom through digital platforms. The purpose is to create a richer,
more flexible educational experience that makes use of the strengths of both physical and virtual
learning environments. Apart from the face to face physical environment, the virtual learning
environment can happen in two main ways: synchronous and asynchronous as summarized
below (Hodges, & Barbour, 2022).
Face-to-face learning refers to the traditional model where students and teachers meet physically
in a classroom setting. The teacher or instructor offer guidance to the learners observing the
schedules according to the fixed time on the timetable. In blended learning, face-to-face sessions
are a crucial part they often focus on activities that benefit most from direct interaction, like
group discussions, lab experiments, practical demonstrations, or live feedback from the teacher.
For example, in a blended senior school chemistry class, students might attend a laboratory
session in person to perform experiments that cannot be simulated online.
Synchronous learning means that students and teachers interact in real-time, even though they
might not be in the same physical location. This could happen through video conferencing tools
like Zoom, google meet or Microsoft Teams among others. For instance, after a face-to-face
lecture on world history, the teacher might schedule a live online discussion where students
debate historical interpretations. Even though students are logging in from different places, the
interaction happens at the same scheduled time, just like a physical class. This type of learning
provides immediate feedback, promotes active participation, and fosters a sense of community
among students. One of the key benefits of synchronous learning is the opportunity for real-time
interaction and collaboration. Students can ask questions, engage in discussions, and receive
immediate feedback from instructors, which can enhance their understanding of the material and
promote deeper learning. Synchronous learning also helps create a sense of accountability and
motivation, as students are expected to participate actively during scheduled sessions. However,
synchronous learning may present challenges related to scheduling conflicts, time zone
differences, and technical issues that can hinder participation. To address these challenges,
instructors can provide alternative ways for students to access course materials, such as recorded
lectures, discussion boards, or online resources, to accommodate different learning needs and
preferences.
Asynchronous learning is a method of learning where students are not required to be present at
the same time or in the same location. It allows for flexibility in terms of when and where
students can access educational materials, participate in discussions, and complete assignments
on their own schedule, without real-time interaction. Students are engaged in watching a pre-
recorded video lecture on their own time, participating in a discussion forum throughout the
week, or submitting assignments via an online learning management system like Moodle or
Google Classroom. Asynchronous learning supports flexibility, allowing students to work at their
own pace while still following a structured timeline. One of the main benefits of asynchronous
learning is that it accommodates different learning styles and schedules, allowing students to
learn at their own pace. It also provides an opportunity for students to engage with course
materials in a more thoughtful and reflective manner, as they have the time to digest information
and formulate their thoughts before responding. However, asynchronous learning poses some
challenges, such as the potential for decreased interaction and engagement among students and
instructors. To address this, incorporating interactive elements like discussion forums, group
projects, and video conferences can help enhance the learning experience and foster a sense of
community in an online environment. General, asynchronous learning offers a flexible and
convenient way for students to pursue their education, while also requiring self-discipline and

21
effective time management skills to stay on track with their studies. Teachers and academic staff
in educational institutions should be trained in blended learning pedagogies to effectively utilize
transformative instructional practice, to balance between face-to-face and online learning modes
of delivery (synchronous and asynchronous) as demonstrated in Figure 2.
Figure 2: Blended Learning Modes
In an effective blended learning model, face-to-face sessions are strategically used for building
relationships, tackling complex problems, or clarifying difficult concepts, while synchronous
online sessions provide live interaction when physical attendance isn't possible, and
asynchronous online activities allow for reflection, deeper research, and independent practice.
Incorporating a mix of synchronous and asynchronous learning activities can help create a
balanced and engaging learning experience that caters to different learning styles and
preferences. By leveraging the benefits of both synchronous and asynchronous learning,
educators can create dynamic and interactive learning environments that support student success.
Ultimately, blended learning aims to take the best of both worlds the immediacy and relational
depth of face-to-face education, combined with the flexibility and expanded access to resources
provided by online learning, whether in real-time or self-paced formats.
3.2. Hybrid Learning
However, gives students more flexibility as it allows them to choose whether they participate in-
person or online - combines two types of learning environments. An instructor delivers materials
to learners, some attend class in person, others join the same class virtually from home. Meaning,
the educator teaches remote and physically present students at the same time using tools like
video conferencing hardware and software. Picture a university course where students can either
come to campus for a lecture or join the same lecture remotely via Zoom. Some students might
choose to attend physically every week, others might decide to attend remotely based on their
schedules, or switch between modes. In hybrid learning, the teacher plans lessons with both the
in-person and the online learners equally in mind. The fundamental point is that students have the
option the system is designed to work well whether they are physically present or attend
remotely. Notably, in blended learning, all students usually experience both online and face-to-
face elements together in a structured way, while in hybrid learning, students are given the choice
to attend physically or virtually, and the learning experience is adapted to support both types of
participation.

22
3.3. Modes of Online Learning
Some scholars classify modes of online learning differently to facilitate remote education and
to cater for different learning styles and preferences. Common modes of online learning include:
Synchronous Learning: Involves real-time interaction between students and instructors through
live online classes, video conferences, or webinars. This mode allows for immediate feedback
and active participation.
Asynchronous Learning: Involves self-paced learning where students access pre-recorded
lectures, readings, and assignments at their convenience. This mode offers flexibility for students
to study at their own pace.
Hybrid Learning: combines two types of learning environments. An instructor delivers materials
to learners, some attend class in person, others join the same class remotely or virtually from
home.
Online Discussion Forums: Provide a platform for students to engage in discussions, share ideas,
ask questions, and collaborate with peers and instructors. This mode promotes communication
and community building in online learning environments.
Multimedia and Interactive Content: Utilizes various digital resources such as videos,
simulations, interactive modules, and virtual labs to enhance engagement and facilitate active
learning. By incorporating these modes of online learning, educators can create a dynamic and
inclusive virtual learning environment that supports student learning and engagement in a remote
setting.
4. BLENDED LEARNING MODELS
Blended learning models are educational approaches that combine traditional face-to-face
classroom methods with online and digital learning activities (Tucker, 2022). Instead of relying
solely on in-person instruction or only on virtual platforms, blended learning aims to create a
more flexible, personalized, and engaging learning experience by integrating both environments
thoughtfully (Trust, & Whalen, 2023). The balance between online and face-to-face learning can
vary depending on the model. Some blended learning models give students a lot of control over
the time, place, pace, or path of their learning, while others are more structured with specific
schedules and sequences. There are seven types of blended learning models as summarized.
In the Rotation Model, students move between different learning stations or activities, which
include a mix of online and face-to-face experiences. Each student follows a set schedule or path.
Example: In a primary school, students might spend 30 minutes doing math exercises online, then
rotate to a small group discussion with a teacher, and finally rotate again to complete hands-on

23
activities with their classmates. The Rotation Model is one of the most widely used blended
learning models, especially in primary and secondary education. (Drysdale, & Graham, 2023). In
this model, students move through a fixed schedule of different learning activities some led by a
teacher and others completed independently online. These rotations are either teacher-directed or
self-paced, depending on the design of the program.
A typical setup in the Rotation Model might include students spending a portion of their time in
direct instruction with a teacher, another portion working independently on online modules, and
another part engaged in group projects or peer discussions. The key feature is that each student
rotates through these different modes of learning within a structured schedule. There are several
common variations within the Rotation Model itself:
 Station Rotation: Students rotate between different physical stations within the
classroom. For example, a fourth-grade math class could have three stations: one for
online math practice, one for small-group instruction with the teacher, and one for hands-
on math games or collaborative problem-solving.
 Lab Rotation: Students rotate out of their main classroom into a separate computer lab to
complete the online portion of their work. This is often used in schools with limited
technology in the classroom but with access to centralized computer labs.
 Flipped Rotation: A variation where students rotate between learning new material
online at home and applying it in class through projects and discussions.
 Individual Rotation: Students have personalized rotation paths based on their learning
needs. Some students might spend longer on online activities, while others might require
more face-to-face tutoring (Hodges, & Barbour, 2022).
The Rotation Model in Practice - a middle school English class using a Station Rotation
approach. The students spend 20 minutes at Station 1 reading an article online and answering
comprehension questions, 20 minutes at Station 2 discussing the article’s theme with the teacher
and a small group, and 20 minutes at Station 3 writing a personal reflection in their journals.
Every group gets to experience all three stations within the class period.
The Rotation Model allows for differentiated instruction because students can receive more
personalized support during small-group sessions. It also fosters greater student engagement, as
students are constantly moving and changing activities. Plus, it maximizes use of technology
without needing a 1:1 student-device ratio all the time, making it cost-effective.
In the Flipped Classroom Model, students first encounter new material outside of class, usually
through video lectures or readings. Class time is then used for active learning like discussions,
projects, or problem-solving (Tucker, 2022). Example, a high school physics teacher assigns
students to watch a video about Newton’s Laws at home. In class the next day, instead of
lecturing, the teacher guides students through experiments that apply the laws. The Flipped
Classroom Model reverses the traditional approach to teaching. Instead of introducing new
content during class and assigning practice activities (like homework) afterward, students first
learn the material outside of class usually through videos, readings, or other online resources
and then apply what they've learned during face-to-face class sessions. In this model, direct
instruction happens online, and active learning happens in the classroom. Class time is no longer
used mainly for lectures but instead for collaborative activities like discussions, problem-solving
exercises, group projects, debates, experiments, and case studies. The teacher shifts from being
the primary source of information to acting more as a guide or coach who supports and
challenges students as they work. In Practice - in a high school biology class, students are
assigned to watch a 15-minute video explaining photosynthesis at home. The video might include
embedded questions to check for understanding. When the students come to school the next day,

24
they don't listen to another lecture on photosynthesis. Instead, they conduct a hands-on
experiment measuring how light intensity affects the rate of photosynthesis in aquatic plants,
working together in small groups with the teacher moving around to offer support and deeper
questioning.
Why is it called "flipped"?
Because it flips the traditional order as summarized in the table
Type of Model Order of Practice
Traditional Model Class = Lecture ➔ Home = Practice
Flipped Model Home = Learn new content ➔ Class = Apply, practice, and discuss
One major benefit is greater student engagement. Since class time is focused on application,
students are more actively involved rather than passively listening (Changpueng, &
Pattanapichet, 2024). Another advantage is self-paced learning students can pause, rewind, and
re-watch online content as needed, which is not possible during a live lecture. The model also
allows for deeper, more personalized instruction during class, as teachers can work directly with
students who are struggling while allowing more advanced learners to move ahead. A strategic
challenge is ensuring that all students actually complete the preparatory online work. If students
arrive unprepared, it can disrupt the classroom activities. Access to technology outside of school
can also be a barrier for some students, requiring schools to plan carefully to ensure equity.
Teachers use video platforms like YouTube, Edpuzzle (for interactive videos), or even create their
own videos using screen recording software. Learning management systems (LMS) like Google
Classroom or Canvas help organize and track student work. The Flipped Classroom Model is
particularly effective in promoting critical thinking, problem-solving, and collaboration, making
it a popular choice in both senior school and university settings.
The Flex Model is heavily based on online learning, but teachers provide support in person when
needed. Students work through digital content at their own pace, and teachers offer targeted help
or workshops based on individual needs. Example: In an adult education center, learners
complete most of their coursework independently online. However, when someone struggles with
a module, they can attend an optional in-person tutoring session with the instructor. The Flex
Model is a form of blended learning where most instruction is delivered online, but with teachers
available on-site to offer support, guidance, and targeted instruction when needed (Tucker,
2022). In this model, students move through the digital content largely at their own pace,
accessing lessons, assignments, and resources through an online platform. The classroom space
transforms into a flexible learning environment more like a workshop or a learning lab where
teachers act as mentors, facilitators, or coaches rather than traditional lecturers. What makes the
Flex Model unique is that online learning is the core, not just a supplement. However, the
presence of teachers provides essential real-time help, whether through small group instruction,
tutoring, or short seminars based on student needs.
In Practice - in a senior school using the Flex Model for English, students come into a large
classroom space where they log into the school’s online learning system. Each student follows a
personalized path: some might be completing a grammar module, others might be drafting essays
with online writing tools, and some might be participating in an online peer review forum.
Throughout the session, teachers circulate around the room, pulling students aside who are
struggling, answering questions, or offering mini-lessons for those who need extra help with a
particular skill.

25
Key Features of the Flex Model:
Students have control over the pace and order of their learning.
Teachers offer just-in-time interventions rather than leading whole-class sessions.
Classrooms are often set up to allow for independent work, small groups, and one-on-one support
(Tucker, 2022).
Technology plays a central role, with content, assessments, and progress tracking all managed
online. One major advantage is personalization students can move more quickly through
material they understand well and spend extra time on topics they find difficult. This can
significantly boost both engagement and achievement. The Flex Model also develops
independent learning skills, preparing students for higher education or professional environments
where self-directed learning is essential. Moreover, because teachers can focus their energy on
students who need the most help, the support becomes more targeted and effective. The Flex
Model demands that students be highly self-motivated and responsible, which can be difficult for
some learners, especially younger ones. Effective implementation also requires strong
infrastructure reliable devices, good internet connectivity, and robust digital content. Teachers
must adapt to a very different role and sometimes need retraining to shift from being "deliverers
of content" to "learning coaches." The model is popular in alternative schools, credit recovery
programs, or any setting where students have diverse needs and benefit from individualized
pacing. However, many traditional schools are now experimenting with the Flex Model in
courses like mathematics, science, and language arts. It gives students greater control over their
learning while still maintaining strong teacher support, making it a powerful and modern
approach to education.
In A La Carte Model, students take one or more courses entirely online alongside their regular
face-to-face school schedule. It gives students the flexibility to supplement their education with
subjects not offered in their school. For example, a student enrolled in a rural high school attends
regular classes in math and English on campus but takes an advanced Mandarin Chinese course
online through a virtual school. The A La Carte Model sometimes called the Self-Blend Model
is a form of blended learning where students take one or more courses entirely online in addition
to their traditional in-person classes. Unlike models where online learning and face-to-face
learning are tightly integrated within the same course, in A La Carte, students separately choose
online courses that supplement or expand their academic program (Powell, et. al. 2022). In this
setup, students usually attend a traditional school for most of their classes but register for online
courses to meet specific needs: to access subjects not offered at their school, to resolve schedule
conflicts, to recover credits, or to accelerate their learning. Example of the A La Carte Model in
Practice: A senior school student at a small rural school wants to study Advanced Placement
(AP) Computer Science, but the school doesn't offer it due to lack of specialized teachers. The
student enrolls in the course online through an accredited virtual academy. During the day, they
attend physical classes like English, History, and Biology at their regular school, but at a
scheduled time (perhaps in a computer lab or study hall), they complete their AP Computer
Science coursework online, supported by a remote instructor.
Main Features of the A La Carte Model are:
 Students choose individual online courses alongside traditional, in-person learning.
 Online courses are usually offered by external institutions or online programs.
 The learning in online and face-to-face classes is separate, not blended within a single
course.
 Students often have the flexibility to decide when and where they complete their online
coursework.

26
One of the biggest strengths of the A La Carte Model is expanded access. It allows students to
study niche subjects, advanced courses, electives, or special programs that would otherwise be
unavailable. It also offers flexibility in scheduling, helping students balance academics with work,
sports, or family responsibilities. In addition, it supports individualized learning paths, catering to
both high-achievers who want more challenges and struggling students who need credit recovery
options. One main challenge is that students must be self-disciplined and good at managing their
time. Without daily face-to-face contact, students in online courses risk falling behind if they
don't stay motivated. Schools also need to ensure that the online providers they partner with
maintain high-quality standards and offer meaningful support to students. The model is highly
effective in senior schools, particularly in settings where course offerings are limited by staff,
budget, or location. It's also popular in home-school environments and with students who have
special scheduling needs, such as elite athletes or young artists with demanding training
schedules. The A La Carte Model empowers students by offering them more choices and
flexibility without losing the structure and community of their traditional schooling (Moore, et al,
2022).
In the Enriched Virtual Model, students have a blend of online learning and occasional face-to-
face meetings. However, unlike the Flipped Classroom, face-to-face sessions are less frequent
and online learning forms the bulk of the course. For example, a university offers a business
course where students complete most modules online, but meet with the professor twice during
the semester for intensive workshops and project presentations. The Enriched Virtual Model is a
blended learning approach where students complete most of their coursework online but also
attend some face-to-face sessions with their teacher. Unlike full-time virtual learning, the
Enriched Virtual Model still values occasional physical interaction to deepen understanding,
strengthen relationships, and provide targeted support (Tucker, 2022).
The Lab Rotation Model - students rotate to a computer lab for the online portion of their
learning, rather than using personal devices in the classroom. Example: Middle school students
attend English class for discussions and grammar lessons, but for the writing practice and
vocabulary drills, they move to a designated computer lab where they use specialized writing
software. The Lab Rotation Model is a type of blended learning where students rotate between
different learning stations, and one of those stations is a dedicated computer lab where they
engage in online learning. Unlike some other blended models, the rotation here is fixed or
teacher-scheduled not necessarily student-chosen. It’s structured but still flexible enough to
personalize learning. In a senior School Credit Recovery Program - a senior school can
implement a Lab Rotation Model specifically for students who are behind in credits. These
students attend a regular schedule of classes but rotate daily into a lab period where they work
through online courses designed to help them catch up. Teachers and support staff are present in
the lab to assist, but the core instruction during that rotation comes from the online modules. This
setup allows students to progress at their own speed without pulling them out of their normal
classes entirely. The main goal about the Lab Rotation Model is that online learning doesn’t
replace face-to-face instruction it complements it through a well-organized system of rotations.
It’s a powerful model for schools that want to integrate technology without going fully virtual
(Ndwiga, & Khaemba, 2024).
Individual Rotation Model is where each student has a customized schedule based on their
specific learning needs. They rotate through activities but not necessarily at the same pace or
sequence as their classmates. For example, in a personalized learning program, Student A spends
more time on online reading modules because they struggle with comprehension, while Student B
moves faster and spends additional time doing in-person creative writing workshops. Each of
these blended learning models adjusts the balance between online and face-to-face activities
depending on the learning goals, student needs, and available resources. The Individual Rotation

27
Model is a blended learning strategy where each student follows a personalized schedule of
rotating between different learning activities. Unlike Lab or Station Rotation (where all students
rotate on the same schedule), in the Individual Rotation Model, students’ paths are customized
based on their needs, skills, and progress. Some students might rotate between online lessons,
small group work, teacher instruction, and independent practice, but not necessarily in the same
sequence or to the same stations (Zheng, & Kwon, 2023).
For example, in an elementary school, students in a second-grade reading class are given an
individualized learning plan based on their reading level. A struggling reader might start the day
with an online phonics game, then meet one-on-one with the teacher for guided reading, then
move to a peer reading station. Meanwhile, a more advanced reader could begin with
independent novel reading, proceed to an online comprehension quiz, and later join a creative
writing workshop. Each student's rotation looks different, aligned with their strengths and needs.
In a middle school using the Individual Rotation Model for math, students’ schedules are
generated weekly. Some students who need extra help spend more time with a live teacher for
remediation, while others who have mastered current content spend more time in the computer
lab working on advanced topics through adaptive online programs. One student might rotate
between teacher-led instruction, a math club project group, and online problem-solving
challenges while another student may skip the project group entirely and spend extra time doing
foundational skill work online. In a senior school career-focused program, students interested in
engineering rotate based on their progress through modules. A student needing more support
might move from an online physics simulation to a one-on-one tutoring session, then to hands-on
robotics lab time. Another student who has already mastered certain skills might go straight from
the online module to an independent project designing a prototype. The individual rotation paths
are dynamic and updated depending on real-time data gathered from online activities and teacher
observations.
Table 1: A Comparative Table; Blended Learning vs Traditional and Online Learning
S/
N
Aspect Traditional Learning Online Learning Blended Learning
1 Learning
Environment
Physical classroom
only
Virtual platform only Combination of physical and
virtual environments
2 Flexibility Fixed schedule and
location
Highly flexible
(anytime, anywhere)
Moderately flexible (self-
paced and scheduled sessions)
3 Student
Engagement
Often passive (lectures,
notes)
Can be isolating if not
interactive
High (interactive tools,
simulations, discussions)
4 Learning Style
Support
Limited (mostly
auditory and visual)
Strong if well-designed Strong (supports auditory,
visual, and kinesthetic)
5 Student
Autonomy
Low (teacher-led) High (self-directed) Medium to high (structured
independence)
6 Access to
Resources
Textbooks, notes Vast, but may require
strong digital skills
Broad access (textbooks +
digital content)
7 Teacher Role Content deliverer Facilitator or guide Facilitator and integrator of
both modes
8 Technology
Requirement
Minimal High (reliable internet
and devices)
Moderate (internet + periodic
access to devices)
9 Assessment
Methods
Exams, tests,
assignments
Quizzes, online tests,
forums
Mixed (projects, online &
face-to-face assessments)
10 Cost
Implications
Infrastructure and
personnel-heavy
Lower infrastructure
but high tech cost
Balance of infrastructure and
digital investments
11 Challenges Inflexibility, limited
resources
Digital divide,
motivation, cheating
risks
Access issues, digital literacy,
policy gaps

28
Each model offers a different mix of online and in-person components, and the choice of a
blended learning model depends on various factors, including:
 The nature of the learning outcomes,
 The target audience,
 Available resources, and
 Logistical considerations
These models can be tailored to meet specific educational goals and student needs, providing a
more dynamic and engaging learning environment.
5. INFLUENCE OF BLENDED LEARNING MODELS ON INSTRUCTIONAL
STRATEGIES AND TEACHER ROLES
Blended learning models have significantly influenced instructional strategies and redefined
teacher roles across educational levels. By integrating traditional face-to-face teaching with
online learning components, these models foster dynamic, learner-centered environments that
demand innovative pedagogical approaches and evolving professional identities for educators.
5.1. Influence on Instructional Strategies
Blended learning encourages a shift from passive, lecture-based instruction toward more active,
student-centered strategies. In the flipped classroom model, for example, instructional content is
delivered outside of the classroom via videos or digital readings, while in-class time is reserved
for collaborative problem-solving, discussion, and formative assessment (Bergmann & Sams,
2012). This inversion of the traditional classroom structure enhances students’ opportunities to
engage with material at a deeper cognitive level.
Furthermore, blended models support differentiated instruction and personalized learning, as
digital platforms provide real-time analytics on student performance. Teachers can use this data
to modify lesson plans, tailor learning activities, and provide targeted interventions (Horn &
Staker, 2015). Instruction becomes more responsive to individual learner needs, improving both
engagement and outcomes.
The integration of multimodal instructional resources including videos, simulations, and
interactive assessments also broadens pedagogical strategies. These tools allow educators to
accommodate diverse learning styles, foster critical thinking, and reinforce concepts through
various channels (Graham et al., 2019). As such, instructional design in blended learning
environments becomes more modular, flexible, and outcome-focused.
Moreover, some models, such as station rotation, encourage the use of small-group instruction,
independent practice, and digital exploration in a single class period. This promotes active
learning and facilitates classroom differentiation, which is particularly beneficial in mixed-
ability groups (Staker & Horn, 2012).
5.2. Influence on Teacher Roles
Blended learning also redefines the role of the teacher from a content expert to a facilitator,
guide, and learning architect. Instead of delivering knowledge through direct instruction alone,
teachers curate content, design interactive digital experiences, and support student autonomy.

29
This role shift requires teachers to develop competencies in digital literacy, instructional design,
and learner support (Voogt et al., 2015).
In addition, teachers are increasingly required to manage both physical and virtual learning
environments. This involves moderating online forums, providing timely feedback through
learning management systems (LMSs), and ensuring that digital resources align with curricular
goals (Trust & Whalen, 2020). The ability to orchestrate both synchronous and asynchronous
interactions is critical for maximizing the potential of blended learning.
Teachers also take on roles as coaches and mentors, offering individualized support and
motivation, especially in models like the flex model, where students work independently for
much of the learning process. This evolution in role requires strong interpersonal skills, the
ability to track student progress, and the flexibility to intervene when needed (Halverson et al.,
2017).
Moreover, blended learning environments often encourage collaborative teaching practices.
Teachers work more closely with colleagues, IT personnel, and instructional designers to co-
create content and integrate technology effectively. This team-based approach aligns with the rise
of professional learning communities (PLCs), where educators engage in continuous
improvement and shared responsibility for student success (DuFour & Fullan, 2013).
Blended learning models have transformed both instructional strategies and teacher roles by
fostering personalized, active, and technology-enhanced learning environments. These models
challenge educators to go beyond traditional teaching methods, embracing roles as facilitators,
designers, and mentors in both digital and physical spaces. As blended learning continues to
shape 21st-century education, sustained professional development and institutional support will
be critical in helping teachers adapt to these new demands.
6. BENEFITS OF BLENDED LEARNING
Blended learning, which integrates face-to-face instruction with online components, provides a
transformative approach to education that meets the needs of today’s diverse learners and
teaching environments.
One of its core strengths is the flexibility it offers. Students can access course materials anytime,
allowing them to study at their own pace and according to their schedules. This is especially
helpful for learners juggling education with work, family responsibilities, or other commitments,
as it reduces the rigidity of fixed class times.
In addition to flexibility, student engagement is greatly enhanced through the use of interactive
tools and multimedia resources. Teachers can enrich traditional instruction with videos, quizzes,
virtual labs, discussion forums, and simulations, which make lessons more dynamic and tailored
to various learning styles. This multimodal approach ensures that learners remain actively
involved rather than passive recipients of information.
Blended learning also fosters greater learner independence and responsibility. As students take
control of online tasks and manage their own time, they develop essential life skills such as self-
discipline, goal setting, and time management. This not only prepares them for academic success
but also for the demands of the modern workplace.
Another key benefit is personalized learning. Online platforms often adapt to a student's
performance, offering tailored content that addresses individual strengths and weaknesses.

30
Learners can revisit challenging material or advance through topics more quickly, ensuring that
no one is held back or left behind. This adaptability promotes inclusivity and equity in education.
Moreover, blended learning expands access to diverse learning resources. Students are no longer
limited to physical textbooks but can tap into a wide array of digital content ranging from
scholarly articles and podcasts to interactive simulations available 24/7. This widens their
exposure to different perspectives and encourages deeper learning.
The model also encourages collaborative learning, even outside the classroom. With tools such
as online forums, shared documents, and group messaging platforms, students can work together
across time and space. This promotes teamwork, communication, and a sense of community
particularly valuable in large or distributed classes.
Lastly, engaging with content through multiple formats (listening, watching, discussing, and
applying) leads to improved retention and application of knowledge. Students reinforce concepts
through various activities, which enhances their ability to recall and use what they've learned in
real-world settings (Halverson & Graham, 2022).
7. CHALLENGES OF BLENDED LEARNING IN KENYA
Despite its many advantages, implementing blended learning in Kenya presents significant
obstacles, particularly in regions where infrastructure, digital access, and educational readiness
are unevenly distributed as summarized in Figure 4.
Figure 4: Challenges of Blended Learning in Kenya
One of the challenges is limited access to digital technology. In many rural communities, both
students and educators lack reliable electricity, computers, and internet connectivity. This digital
gap can be narrowed through public-private initiatives, such as expanding the Digital Literacy
Programme (DLP), subsidizing devices, and establishing solar-powered community learning
centers equipped with shared digital tools.
Similarly, a high cost of internet and digital devices is a significant obstacle, which places a
financial strain on many households. Government intervention is essential here through zero-
rated educational platforms developed in partnership with internet service providers, tax relief on

31
educational tech, and the promotion of offline-capable learning apps like Eneza Education and
eLimu that function with minimal connectivity.
Another pressing challenge is inadequate infrastructure. Many schools, especially in rural areas,
lack stable electricity, internet access, and basic ICT facilities. To address this, investments must
prioritize foundational infrastructure such as solar energy and satellite internet hubs before rolling
out more advanced digital learning strategies.
Digital literacy gaps further hinder the effective use of blended learning. Many teachers and
students are unfamiliar with digital tools or online pedagogy. Continuous professional
development for teachers, integration of ICT skills in the school curriculum, and mentorship
programs pairing digitally proficient teachers with novices are all essential to building capacity.
The curriculum itself is a limiting factor, having been designed primarily for traditional
instruction. Reviewing it to incorporate digital activities, assessments, and blended modules
especially within the Competency-Based Education is vital. Equally important is the development
of localized, culturally relevant online content in multiple languages to enhance inclusivity.
Resistance to change is another hurdle. Skepticism from educators, students, and parents can
slow adoption. Building trust through success stories, training programs, and gradual introduction
of blended practices can foster acceptance. Involving parents especially in rural areas through
workshops and digital literacy initiatives ensures that learners are supported at home.
Blended learning also risks deepening educational inequality. Without intentional planning,
students from well-resourced areas may benefit more than those from marginalized communities.
A more equitable approach includes deploying a range of delivery modes radio, TV, SMS, and
print materials to supplement online resources, ensuring broad accessibility regardless of
economic status.
Policy and governance gaps have further hampered progress. Kenya currently lacks a
comprehensive national framework for blended learning. Crafting a clear policy complete with
implementation strategies, measurable outcomes, and monitoring systems is crucial to guide
future investments and maintain accountability.
On the learner side, low self-motivation and poor time management present serious challenges.
Without structured schedules and face-to-face accountability, some students struggle to stay
focused. To mitigate this, blended programs should provide clear routines, regular teacher
engagement, and gamified content that sustains interest and motivation.
Finally, assessment and evaluation in digital environments remains difficult. Traditional exams
are poorly suited to online settings, where cheating and monitoring are concerns. Educators
should instead use authentic assessment methods like digital portfolios, group projects, and oral
presentations alongside simple, cost-effective proctoring tools. Training teachers in e-assessment
design will further support valid, credible evaluation practices (Sele et al., 2023).
8. RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the findings and conclusions of this systematic literature review, the following
recommendations are proposed to enhance the adoption and effectiveness of blended learning
models in the Kenyan educational settings:

32
i. Investment in Digital Infrastructure
The success of blended learning is inherently tied to the availability of reliable
technological infrastructure. Therefore, it is recommended that the Kenyan government
and private sector invest significantly in both hardware (computers, tablets, and
smartphones) and software (learning management systems and content platforms).
Moreover, broadband internet access should be prioritized in rural areas to ensure equitable
access for all learners. Partnering with telecommunications companies to provide
affordable data bundles or even zero-rated educational content could alleviate one of the
most significant barriers to blended learning in the country.
ii. Teacher Training and Professional Development
A key challenge identified in the review is insufficient digital literacy among educators.
Teachers must be equipped with both the technical skills to use digital tools effectively and
the pedagogical skills to blend online and face-to-face instruction seamlessly. Therefore,
continuous teacher training programs should be implemented at both pre-service and in-
service levels. These programs should emphasize blended teaching strategies, the
integration of ICT into lesson planning, and the management of online classrooms.
Partnerships with education technology providers and universities could facilitate this
professional development.
iii. Curriculum Redesign to Support Blended Learning
The Competency-Based Curriculum (CBC), should be further adapted to accommodate
blended learning approaches. This adaptation should focus on ensuring that digital literacy
is a core component of the curriculum, preparing learners to use technology effectively
both in and outside the classroom. Additionally, curriculum designers should collaborate
with content creators to develop locally relevant, culturally appropriate online resources
that align with the learning needs and contexts of Kenyan students.
iv. Community Engagement and Awareness Campaigns
For blended learning to be widely accepted, especially in rural and marginalized
communities, awareness campaigns are necessary to inform parents, students, and local
leaders about the benefits and potential of blended learning. These campaigns should aim
to reduce resistance to technological adoption and foster an understanding of how blended
learning can enhance educational outcomes. Community-based initiatives could also offer
opportunities for parents to receive digital literacy training, enabling them to better support
their children’s learning at home, which is in line with parental empowerment and
engagement as envisaged in the Competency-Based Curriculum (CBC). Parents play a
critical role in supporting students, especially in online components of blended learning.
Schools should actively engage parents through orientation sessions, communication
platforms, and regular updates to foster a strong home-school partnership.
v. Development of Localized Content and Platforms
A major limitation in the successful deployment of blended learning models is the scarcity
of local content that resonates with the learners' cultural context. It is recommended that
educational authorities, in collaboration with local content creators, develop Kenyan-
specific learning materials that are both educationally rigorous and culturally relevant.
Additionally, online platforms should be designed with offline capabilities, ensuring that

33
students in areas with poor internet connectivity can still access educational resources
without relying on continuous online access.
vi. Policy Support and Funding
The Kenyan government should play a central role in facilitating the large-scale adoption
of blended learning by providing clear policies that promote its integration into the national
education system. This could include subsidizing educational technology, implementing
tax breaks for technology providers, and setting up funding mechanisms to support the
development of digital learning content. Public-private partnerships should be encouraged
to ensure that blended learning is sustainable and scalable in both urban and rural areas.
vii. Monitoring and Evaluation Systems
To ensure that blended learning models are effectively implemented and achieving the
desired outcomes, it is critical to establish monitoring and evaluation (M&E) systems.
These systems should track progress, identify challenges, and evaluate the effectiveness of
different models of blended learning. Key performance indicators (KPIs) could include
student engagement levels, academic performance, teacher satisfaction, and technological
adoption rates. Regular feedback from students and educators should inform adjustments
to teaching methods and tools.
viii. Encouraging Partnerships with International Organizations
Kenya should seek to collaborate with international organizations, such as UNESCO, the
World Bank, and Ed-tech firms, to benefit from expertise, funding, and innovative
technologies. These partnerships can bring in much-needed external knowledge and
financial support for large-scale digital education projects.
REFERENCES
[1] Alammary, A. (2022). Blended learning models for introductory programming courses: A
systematic review. Education and Information Technologies, 27(1), 15–35.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10678-2
[2] Barbour, M. K., & LaBonte, R. (2023). The evolution of virtual and blended learning in North
America post-pandemic. Journal of Online Learning Research, 9(2), 145–166.
https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/221121/
[3] Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every
day. International Society for Technology in Education.
[4] DuFour, R., & Fullan, M. (2013). Cultures built to last: Systemic PLCs at work. Solution Tree
Press.
[5] Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Schmid, R. F., & Tamim, R. M. (2023). Blended learning
effectiveness: A meta-analysis update. Educational Research Review, 39, 100511.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100511
[6] Bonk, C. J., & Graham, C. R. (Eds.). (2022). The handbook of blended learning: Global
perspectives, local designs (2nd ed.). Wiley.
[7] Changpueng, P., & Pattanapichet, F. (2024). The development of a full online flipped classroom
instructional model for enhancement of engineering students’ English meeting skills and learning
engagement. PASAA, 68, 337–374. ERIC
[8] Chawinga, W. D., & Zozie, P. A. (2016). Increasing access to higher education through open and
distance learning: Empirical findings from Mzuzu University, Malawi. International Review of
Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(4), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v17i4.2409

34
[9] Drysdale, J. S., & Graham, C. R. (2023). Emerging frameworks for individual rotation models
in K-12 settings. Journal of Online Learning Research, 9(1), 43–68.
https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/220921/
[10] Ferdig, R. E., & Pytash, K. E. (2024). Exploring online and blended teaching and learning in K-12
education: Emerging research and opportunities. IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-6684-
8487-7
[11] Gough, D., Oliver, S., & Thomas, J. (2017). An introduction to systematic reviews (2nd ed.).
SAGE Publications.
[12] Graham, C. R., Borup, J., Short, C. R., & Archambault, L. (2019). The design, implementation, and
evaluation of blended learning environments: An integrative review. Educational Technology
Research and Development, 67(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-018-9633-4
[13] Graham, C. R., Borup, J., Short, C. R., & Archambault, L. (2023). Blended learning: Research
perspectives and frameworks. Internet and Higher Education, 58, 100807.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2023.100807
[14] Halverson, L. R., Spring, K., Huyett, S., Henrie, C. R., & Graham, C. R. (2017). Blended learning
research in higher education and K–12 settings. Learning, Design, and Technology, 1–30.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17727-4_6-1
[15] Horn, M. B., & Staker, H. (2015). Blended: Using disruptive innovation to improve schools. Jossey-
Bass.
[16] Halverson, L. R., & Graham, C. R. (2022). Learner-centered blended environments: Bridging
design and implementation. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 23(3), 1– 18.
[17] Hodges, C., & Barbour, M. K. (2022). Lessons learned from the rapid shift to remote teaching:
Implications for blended learning models. Educational Technology Research and Development,
70(4), 1679–1692. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-022-10127-1
[18] Horn, M. B., & Staker, H. (2022). Blended: Using disruptive innovation to improve schools (2nd
ed.). Jossey-Bass.
[19] Gikandi, J. W., & Morrow, D. (2016). Online and blended learning in higher education institutions
in Kenya: Challenges and opportunities. International Journal of Education and
Development using Information and Communication Technology, 12(2), 37–52.
[20] Kiptalam, G. K., & Rodrigues, A. J. (2010). Accessibility and utilization of ICTs among secondary
school teachers in Kenya. International Journal of Education and Development using Information
and Communication Technology, 6(1), 42–53.
[21] Makokha, G. L., & Mutisya, D. N. (2016). Status of e-learning in public universities in Kenya. The
International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(3), 341–359.
https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v17i3.2235
[22] Moore, M. G., Dickson-Deane, C., & Galyen, K. (2022). E-learning, online learning, and distance
learning environments: Are they the same? Internet and Higher Education, 55, 100790.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2022.100790
[23] Ndwiga, M. M., & Khaemba, O. (2024). The effect of students’ perception on the use of blended
learning in public universities in Kenya: A case of the University of Eldoret. Journal of Frontiers in
Humanities and Social Sciences, 2(2), 50–62. https://doi.org/10.69897/jofhscs.v2i2.117
[24] Ndwiga, M. M., Ongeti, K., & Syomwene, A. (2024). The role of students’ characteristics on use of
blended learning approach in selected public universities in Kenya. Journal of Research in
Education and Technology, 2(1),15–28.
https://blueprintacademicpublishers.com/index.php/JORET/article/view/101
[25] Picciano, A. G. (2023). Theories and frameworks for online education: Seeking an integrated
model. Online Learning, 27(1), 48–62. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v27i1.3125
[26] Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., &
Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic
reviews. BMJ, 372,n71.https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
[27] Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines.
Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
[28] Pape, L., Wicks, M., & Horowitz, H. (2022). The online learning imperative: Leadership
perspectives on the future of blended and online education. International Journal on E-Learning,
21(2), 159–174.

35
[29] Powell, A., Kennedy, K., & Patrick, S. (2022). Blended learning models: Global best practices.
International Association for K-12 Online Learning (iNACOL).
https://www.inacol.org/resource/blended-learning-models-global-practices
[30] Sele, J. P., Nyakerario, F., & Wanjiku, C. (2023). Blended learning: Threats and hurdles in
developing countries: A case study of Nigeria and Kenya. Greener Journal of Social Sciences,
13(1), 151–158. https://doi.org/10.15580/gjss.2023.1.112024176
[31] Staker, H., & Horn, M. B. (2012). Classifying K–12 blended learning. Innosight
Institute.https://www.christenseninstitute.org/wpcontent/uploads/2013/04/Classifying-K-12-
blended-learning.pdf
[32] Tarus, J. K., Gichoya, D., & Muumbo, A. (2015). Challenges of implementing e-learning in Kenya:
A case of Kenyan public universities. The International Review of Research in Open and
Distributed Learning, 16(1), 120–141.1694876
[33] Trust, T., & Whalen, J. (2023). K-12 teachers’ experiences and perspectives on blended learning
during and after COVID-19. TechTrends, 67(2), 215–225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-022-
00750-2
[34] Trust, T., & Whalen, J. (2020). K–12 teachers’ experiences and challenges with using technology
for emergency remote teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic. TechTrends, 64, 703–718.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-020-00555-7
[35] Tucker, C. (2022). Balance with blended learning: Partner with your students to reimagine learning
and reclaim your life. Corwin Press.
[36] UNESCO. (2023). Technology in education: A tool on whose terms? United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000386508
[37] Voogt, J., Fisser, P., Roblin, N. P., Tondeur, J., & van Braak, J. (2015). Technological pedagogical
content knowledge–A review of the literature. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31(2), 109–
121. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12087
[38] Zheng, B., Lin, C.-H., & Kwon, J. B. (2023). The impact of student engagement on learning
outcomes in online learning environments. Educational Technology & Society, 26(2), 19–30.
[39] Zimmerman, W. A. (2023). Designing effective online driver models: Challenges and opportunities.
International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 24(1), 102–118.
https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v24i1.6235
AUTHOR
Beatrice N. Manyasi is an Associate Professor specializing in Language Education and currently serves as
the Director of the Board of Postgraduate Studies at Maasai Mara University in Kenya. She earned her PhD
from Moi University and has an extensive record of publications in peer-reviewed journals. In addition to
her writing, she contributes as a reviewer of scholarly articles and book chapters. Her authored works
include: Communicative Competencies: The Role of Strategic Silence in Quelling Emotional Red Flags
(2025), Language Education for Sustainable Development: Application of Literature-Based Models (2024)
and Effectiveness of Audio Instructional Materials in Enhancing Acquisition of Pre-Reading Skills among
Pre-School Learners in Narok County, Kenya (2024) among others. Prof. Manyasi has previously held
leadership roles including Dean of the School of Education, Chairperson of the Department of Curriculum,
Instruction and Education Management, and Director of the Kajiado Campus at Maasai Mara University.
Her research interests encompass language education, applied linguistics, pedagogy, curriculum
instruction, and educational technology. Her ORCID iD is https://orcid.org/0009-0000-9510-6083

Blended Learning; Models for Transforming Instructional Practice

More Related Content

Similar to Blended Learning; Models for Transforming Instructional Practice (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Blended Learning; Models for Transforming Instructional Practice