Skip to content
PaperFren

Blended learning

Does half the classroom time hurt flexible learners?

Müller C, Mildenberger T, Steingruber D · International journal of educational technology in higher education · 2023

Open access · cc by · source: Europe PMC

A flexible blended business programme with about half the on-site time showed essentially equivalent exam performance to part-time peers.

Study at a glance

Design
Other — Comparison of FLEX blended vs part-time exam results across many courses
N
N=14460 · 2,822 FLEX and 11,638 part-time exams across 133 courses (2015–2019)
Population
Business Bachelor's students in FLEX blended vs part-time programmes
Outcome
Exam performance equivalence despite ~51% less face-to-face time

Structured fields used in claim comparison tables when every cited study has a complete layer.

Key findings

The overall effect size for FLEX versus part-time was close to zero despite the large reduction in classroom time. Significant exam differences appeared in only a minority of courses, sometimes favoring FLEX and sometimes part-time.

Methodology

Researchers evaluated a FLEX blended Bachelor's format that cut face-to-face time by roughly half versus a part-time programme. They compared thousands of exam results across more than a hundred courses between 2015 and 2019 and examined course evaluations and design factors.

Limitations

Equivalence on exams is not proof of identical soft-skill or long-term career outcomes. The study is situated in one Swiss business programme and self-selection into FLEX may differ from random assignment.

How this study connects

Role on claims

Each row is a claim on a concept or method page where this paper supports, challenges, or qualifies the statement. Roles are hand-checked — not a model guess.

  • SupportsBlended Learningconcept

    A flexible blended programme with substantially reduced on-site time can show essentially equivalent exam performance to a part-time comparison programme.

    Evidence for the claim as stated.

  • SupportsBlended Learningconcept

    Equivalence on exams in one flexible programme does not imply identical soft-skill or long-term outcomes, and single-provider success ratings cannot prescribe one global blended model.

    Evidence for the claim as stated.

  • SupportsEffect Sizemethod

    A Swiss FLEX Bachelor’s format cut face-to-face time by about 51% versus a part-time programme. Researchers compared 2,822 FLEX exams with 11,638 part-time exams in 133 courses (2015–2019; FLEX n students = 278, part-time = 1,068). The overall effect size was close to zero and not significantly different from zero; exam differences were significant in only 24 of 133 courses, sometimes favouring FLEX and sometimes part-time. Equivalence on exams is not proof of identical soft-skill or career outcomes.

    Evidence for the claim as stated.

  • SupportsEffect Sizemethod

    Near-zero and large are both in this set because the contrasts differ. FLEX’s programme-level exam effect is ~0 despite 51% less classroom time (only 24/133 courses significant). Peer feedback’s Partial η² = 0.35 is a single-group pre/post on essays. Science-simulation undergraduates (n = 1,034; 536 male, 498 female) reported high engagement and satisfaction with no control-group d at all. You cannot rank those as competing estimates of 'whether blended learning works'.

    Evidence for the claim as stated.

  • SupportsEffect Sizemethod

    Statistical significance and educational size part company. COVID UDL ratings were significantly poorer on two principles among volunteers. FLEX found significant course-level exam differences in a minority of 133 courses while the pooled effect sat at zero. 'Significant' is not a shared importance ranking.

    Evidence for the claim as stated.

Open questions

Tensions this paper is part of

From concept pages' “where studies disagree.” Disagreement means the same question; scope means different assays, populations, or outcomes.

  • Scope difference — different assays, populations, or outcomes

    Equivalence on exams in one flexible programme does not imply identical soft-skill or long-term outcomes, and single-provider success ratings cannot prescribe one global blended model.

  • Scope difference — different assays, populations, or outcomes

    SupportsEffect Size

    Near-zero and large are both in this set because the contrasts differ. FLEX’s programme-level exam effect is ~0 despite 51% less classroom time (only 24/133 courses significant). Peer feedback’s Partial η² = 0.35 is a single-group pre/post on essays. Science-simulation undergraduates (n = 1,034; 536 male, 498 female) reported high engagement and satisfaction with no control-group d at all. You cannot rank those as competing estimates of 'whether blended learning works'.

  • Scope difference — different assays, populations, or outcomes

    SupportsEffect Size

    Statistical significance and educational size part company. COVID UDL ratings were significantly poorer on two principles among volunteers. FLEX found significant course-level exam differences in a minority of 133 courses while the pooled effect sat at zero. 'Significant' is not a shared importance ranking.

Related papers in this topic

Same topic cluster — not a recommendation engine.