Top

Education and Information Technologies

Published in:

06-01-2021

Transparency in previous literature reviews about blended learning in higher education

Authors: Robin Castro-Gil, Diego Correa

Published in: Education and Information Technologies | Issue 3/2021

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

Literature reviews as standalone papers serve various purposes; these include the development of new theories, the shaping of future research, the production or knowledge dissemination, and support of evidence-based practices. Review papers, as a foundational block of the research process, may promote further research with higher level of quality. However, in some cases, this methodological approach raises questions about their scientific rigor, trustworthiness, systematicity, and transparency. The main goal of this study is to assess transparency levels in previous review papers pertaining to blended learning in higher education. To complete this goal, this study collects and analyzes information about the report of methodological decisions and research activities in 40 review papers. As a result, in this descriptive review paper, we identify some patterns about the type of reviews and their transparency levels. Findings also demonstrate that most efforts (80%) remain focused on describing a phenomenon in the formats of narrative reviews (65%) and descriptive reviews (15%). These types of papers show low levels of transparency in their reporting process. Nevertheless, trends indicate in the last 5 years an increase in other types of published review papers such as critical, meta-analysis, and qualitative systematic reviews. This represents an important shift in the research domain. Finally, we argue that, regardless of its type, each review paper should have a minimum level of transparency in order to ensure trustworthiness in the research process.

previous article The effect of technology-assisted and project-based learning approaches on students’ attitudes towards mathematics and their academic achievement

next article Digital competences of residents in Kuyavian-Pomeranian Voivodeship in the light of the polish training project “E-active”

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Available only for authorised users

Abu Hassana, R., & Woodcock, A. (2013). Blended learning: Issues and concerns. Discovery, 3, 5–9.

Alammary, A., Sheard, J., & Carbone, A. (2014). Blended learning in higher education: Three different design approaches. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 30, 440–454.CrossRef

Al-Azawei, A., Serenelli, F., & Lundqvist, K. (2016). Universal design for learning (UDL): A content analysis of peer- reviewed journal papers from 2012 to 2015. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching & Learning, 16, 39–56.CrossRef

Alebaikan, R., & Troudi, S. (2010). Blended learning in Saudi universities: Challenges and perspectives. ALT-J: Research in Learning Technology, 18, 49–59.CrossRef

Alkraiji, A., & Eidaroos, A. (2016). Trends and issues in educational technology research in Saudi higher education: A meta-analysis review. Journal of Education and Practice, 7, 62–79.

Arbaugh, J. B. (2014). What might online delivery teach us about blended management education? Prior perspectives and future directions. Journal of Management Education, 38, 784–817.

Arbaugh, J. B., Godfrey, M. R., Johnson, M., Pollack, B. L., Niendorf, B., & Wresch, W. (2009). Research in online and blended learning in the business disciplines: Key findings and possible future directions. Internet & Higher Education, 12, 71–87.CrossRef

Arbaugh, J. B., Desai, A., Rau, B., & Sridhar, B. S. (2010). A review of research on online and blended learning in the management disciplines: 1994–2009. Organization Management Journal, 7, 39–55.CrossRef

Bandara, W., Furtmueller, E., Gorbacheva, E., Miskon, S., & Beekhuyzen, J. (2015). Achieving rigor in literature reviews: Insights from qualitative data analysis and tool-support. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 37, 154–204.CrossRef

Berk, R. A. (2013). Face-to-face versus online course evaluations: A “Consumer’s guide” to seven strategies. Journal of Online Learning & Teaching, 9, 140–148.

Bernard, R., Borokhovski, E., Schmid, R., Tamim, R., & Abrami, P. (2014). A meta-analysis of blended learning and technology use in higher education: From the general to the applied. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 26, 87–122.CrossRef

Bliuc, A.-M., Goodyear, P., & Ellis, R. A. (2007). Research focus and methodological choices in studies into students' experiences of blended learning in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 10, 231–244.CrossRef

Boelens, R., De Wever, B., & Voet, M. (2017). Four key challenges to the design of blended learning: A systematic literature review. Educational Research Review, 22, 1–18.CrossRef

Boell, S. K., & Cecez-Kecmanovic, D. (2015). On being ‘systematic’ in literature reviews in IS. Journal of Information Technology, 30, 161–173.CrossRef

Bogdan, R., Bicen, H., Holotescu, C. (2017). Current trends in blending university courses with MOOCs. In the 13th international scientific conference eLearning and software for education Bucharest, April 27–28. https://doi.org/10.12753/2066-026x-17-000.

Boone, J. (2015). Leading learning organizations through transformational change. International Journal of Educational Management, 29, 275–283.

Booth, A., Sutton, A., & Papaioannou, D. (2016). Systematic approaches to a successful literature review. London: Sage.

Brown, M. G. M. U. E. (2016). Blended instructional practice: A review of the empirical literature on instructors’ adoption and use of online tools in face-to-face teaching. Internet & Higher Education, 31, 1–10.CrossRef

Caravias, V. (2015). Literature review in conceptions and approaches to teaching using blended learning. International Journal of Innovation in the Digital Economy (IJIDE), 6, 46–73.CrossRef

Castro, R. (2019). Blended learning in higher education: Trends and capabilities. Educ Inf Technol 24, 2523–2546. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09886-3.

Cooper, H. M. (1988). Organizing knowledge syntheses: A taxonomy of literature reviews. Knowledge in Society, 1, 104.

Crawford, R., & Jenkins, L. (2015). Investigating the importance of team teaching and blended learning in tertiary music education. Australian Journal of Music Education, 23, 3–17.

Drysdale, J. S., Graham, C. R., Spring, K. J., & Halverson, L. R. (2013). An analysis of research trends in dissertations and theses studying blended learning. Internet and Higher Education, 17, 90–100.CrossRef

Duhaney, D. C. (2012). Blended learning and teacher preparation programs. International Journal of Instructional Media, 39, 197–203.

Dzakiria, H., Don, W. M. S., & Abdul Rahman, H. D. (2012). Blended learning (BL) as pedagogical alternative to teach business communication course: Case study of UUM executive diploma program. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 13, 297–315.

Dziuban, C., Graham, C. R., Moskal, P. D., Norberg, A., & Sicilia, N. (2018). Blended learning: The new normal and emerging technologies. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 15, 3.CrossRef

Fernandes, J., Costa, R., & Peres, P. (2016). Putting order into our universe: The concept of blended learning – a methodology within the concept-based terminology framework. Education Sciences, 6, 15.CrossRef

Fink, A. 2019. Conducting research literature reviews: From the internet to paper.

Garrison, D., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. Internet and Higher Education, 7, 95–105.CrossRef

Gikandi, J. W., Morrow, D., & Davis, N. E. (2011). Online formative assessment in higher education: A review of the literature. Computers & Education, 57, 2333–2351.CrossRef

Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 26, 91–108.CrossRef

Halverson, L. R., Graham, C. R., Spring, K. J., Drysdale, J. S., & Henrie, C. R. (2014). A thematic analysis of the most highly cited scholarship in the first decade of blended learning research. Internet & Higher Education, 20, 20–34.CrossRef

Harris, P., Connolly, J., & Feeney, L. (2009). Blended learning: Overview and recommendations for successful implementation. Industrial and Commercial Training, 41, 155–163.CrossRef

Israel, M. J. (2015). Effectiveness of integrating MOOCs in traditional classrooms for undergraduate students. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 16, 102–118.CrossRef

Keengwe, J., & Jung-Jin, K. (2012). Blended learning in teacher preparation programs: A literature review. International Journal of Information & Communication Technology Education, 8, 81–93.CrossRef

Lamport, M. A., & Hill, R. J. (2012). Impact of hybrid instruction on student achievement in post-secondary institutions: A synthetic review of the literature. Journal of Instructional Research, 1, 49–58.CrossRef

Levy, Y., & Ellis, T. J. (2006). A systems approach to conduct an effective literature review in support of information systems research. Informing Science, 9, 181–212.CrossRef

Loncar, M., Barrett, N. E., & Liu, G. Z. (2014). Towards the refinement of forum and asynchronous online discussion in educational contexts worldwide: Trends and investigative approaches within a dominant research paradigm. Computers & Education, 73, 93–110.CrossRef

Ma’arop, A. H., & Embi, M. A. (2016). Implementation of blended learning in higher learning institutions: A review of the literature. International Education Studies, 9, 41–52.CrossRef

Margulieux, L. E., Mccracken, W. M., & Catrambone, R. (2016). A taxonomy to define courses that mix face-to-face and online learning. Educational Research Review, 19, 104–118.CrossRef

Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., & Baki, M. (2013). The effectiveness of online and blended learning: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Teachers College Record, 115, 1–47.CrossRef

Oliver, M., & Trigwell, K. (2005). Can ‘blended learning’ be redeemed? E-Learning and Digital Media, 2, 17–26.

Paré, G., Trudel, M.-C., Jaana, M., & Kitsiou, S. (2015). Synthesizing information systems knowledge: A typology of literature reviews. Information & Management, 52, 183–199.CrossRef

Paré, G., Tate, M., Johnstone, D., & Kitsiou, S. (2016). Contextualizing the twin concepts of systematicity and transparency in information systems literature reviews. European Journal of Information Systems, 25, 493–508.CrossRef

Pavla, S., Hana, V., Jan, V., Bures, Z., & Marsalek, P. (2015). Blended learning: Promising strategic alternative in higher education. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 171, 1245–1254.CrossRef

Pawson, R., Greenhalgh, T., Harvey, G., & Walshe, K. (2005). Realist review – a new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 10(Suppl 1), 21–34.CrossRef

Picciano, A. 2009. Blending with purpose: The multimodal model. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, v. 13 n 1, p. 7–18.

Robles Haros, B. I., Fernández Nistal, M. T., & Vales García, J. J. (2016). Creencias de profesores universitarios sobre la enseñanza-aprendizaje de cursos B-Learning. Revisión bibliográfica, EDMETIC, 5(2), 94–116. https://doi.org/10.21071/edmetic.v5i2.5778.

Rowe, F. (2014). What literature review is not: Diversity, boundaries and recommendations. European Journal of Information Systems, 23, 241–255.CrossRef

Rowe, M., Frantz, J., & Bozalek, V. (2012). The role of blended learning in the clinical education of healthcare students: A systematic review. Medical Teacher, 34, e216–e221.CrossRef

Shavelson, R. J., Towne, L., & Council, N. R. (2002). Scientific research in education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Shivetts, C. (2011). E-learning and blended learning: The importance of the learner: A research literature review. International Journal on E-Learning, 10, 331–337.

Smith, S. U., Hayes, S., & Shea, P. (2017). A critical review of the use of Wenger’s Community of Practice (CoP) theoretical framework in online and blended learning research, 2000–2014. Online Learning, 21, 209–237.CrossRef

Sophonhiranrak, S., Suwannatthachote, P., & Ngudgratoke, S. (2015). Factors affecting creative problem solving in the blended learning environment: A review of the literature. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 2130–2136.CrossRef

Suprabha, K., & Subramonian, G. (2015). Blended learning approach for enhancing students learning experiences in a knowledge society. Journal of Educational Technology, 11, 1–7.

Templier, M., & Paré, G. (2015). A framework for guiding and evaluating literature reviews. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 37, 112–137.CrossRef

Templier, M., & Paré, G. (2018) Transparency in literature reviews: an assessment of reporting practices across review types and genres in top IS journals. European Journal of Information Systems, 27:(5), 503–550. https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085X.2017.1398880.

Tong, A., Flemming, K., Mcinnes, E., Oliver, S., & Craig, J. (2012). Enhancing transparency in reporting the synthesis of qualitative research: ENTREQ. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 12, 181–188.CrossRef

Torrisi-Steele, G., & Drew, S. (2013). The literature landscape of blended learning in higher education: The need for better understanding of academic blended practice. International Journal for Academic Development, 18, 371–383.CrossRef

Tricco, A. C., Tetzlaff, J., & Moher, D. (2011). The art and science of knowledge synthesis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 64, 11–20.CrossRef

Tshabalala, M., Ndeya-Ndereya, C., & Van Der Merwe, T. (2014). Implementing blended learning at a developing university: Obstacles in the way. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 12, 101–110.

Vasileiou, I. (2009). Blended learning: The transformation of higher education curriculum. Open Education: The Journal for Open & Distance Education & Educational Technology, 5, 77–87.

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.CrossRef

Vom Brocke, J., Simons, A., Niehaves, B., Riemer, K., Plattfaut, R. & Cleven, A. (2009). Reconstructing the giant: On the importance of rigour in documenting the literature search process. 17th European Conference on Information Systems, ECIS, 2009.

Wagner, G., Prester, J., Roche, M., Benlian, A. & Schryen, G (2016). Factors affecting the scientific impact of literature reviews: A scientometric study. 2016 International conference on information systems, ICIS 2016.

Webster, J., & Watson, R. T. (2002). Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: Writing a literature review. MIS Quarterly, 26, xiii–xxiii.

Weightman, A. L., Farnell, D. J. J., Morris, D., Strange, H., & Hallam, G. (2017). A systematic review of information literacy programs in higher education: Effects of faceto- face, online, and blended formats on student skills and views. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, 12, 20–55.CrossRef

Whittemore, R., Chao, A., Jang, M., Minges, K. E., & Park, C. (2014). Methods for knowledge synthesis: An overview. Heart & Lung, 43, 453–461.CrossRef

Title: Transparency in previous literature reviews about blended learning in higher education
Authors: Robin Castro-Gil
Diego Correa
Publication date: 06-01-2021
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Education and Information Technologies / Issue 3/2021
Print ISSN: 1360-2357
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7608
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10406-x

Springer Professional

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Other articles of this Issue 3/2021

Contextualized mobile game-based learning application for computing education

Implementing dynamicity in research designs for collaborative digital writing

Mobile devices in early childhood education: teachers’ views on benefits and barriers

Effects of online language testing on final examination

Situating ICT in early childhood teacher education

Healthcare data management conceptual framework for service delivery

Premium Partner