The Role of Gender and Year of Study on Learning Engagement in a Blended Learning Context

Authors

  • Xuan Di

    School of Oriental Languages, Anhui International Studies University, Hefei 231201, China
  • Shuhan Ma

    School of Oriental Languages, Anhui International Studies University, Hefei 231201, China
  • Chaoyu Lin

    School of Oriental Languages, Anhui International Studies University, Hefei 231201, China

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i7.9623
Received: 21 April 2025 | Revised: 15 May 2025 | Accepted: 9 June 2025 | Published Online: 4 July 2025

Abstract

With the development of science and technology, blended learning (BL) has replaced traditional face-to-face teaching to become the mainstream learning mode in colleges and universities. This shift has led to the emergence of various teaching and learning challenges, particularly concerning students' learning engagement (LE) within the BL environment. Previous research indicates that students' learning engagement is greater in face-to-face teaching environments compared to online teaching modes. Conversely, some scholars hold a differing viewpoint. The purpose of this study was to investigate the factors that influence student engagement in blended learning environments, with a particular focus on the effects of gender and years of study. This research employed a quantitative approach utilizing a questionnaire, with a sample of 936 participants selected through random sampling. The findings revealed that there was no significant difference in LE between male and female students, but there was a significant difference in engagement between different years of study, with third-year students being significantly more engaged than students from other years of study in a blended learning context. Conversely, second-year students are significantly less engaged in learning than students in other grades. The research findings may provide theoretical support and practical guidance for educational reform in higher education institutions, promoting flexibility and personalization in teaching. The implications of the study were discussed.

Keywords:

Gender Study; Year of Study; Learning Engagement; Blended Learning Context

References

[1] Driscoll, M., 2002. Blended Learning: Let's Get beyond the Hype. E-Learning and Digital Media. 1(4), 1–4.

[2] Johannes, C.C., 2020. Towards a New Definition of Blended Learning. The Electronic Journal of eLearning. 18(2), 114–121.

[3] Yan, Y., Yoon, L.F., 2024. What are the roles of positive psychological construct in blended learning contexts? Integrating academic buoyancy into the Community of Inquiry framework. Frontiers in Psychology. 15, 1354156.

[4] Raisa, P.I., Natalia, O.A., Saule, D.B., et al., 2022. Blended Learning in Higher Education: Diversifying Models and Practical Recommendations for Researchers. Frontiers in Education. 7, 957199.

[5] Bokolo, J.A., Kamaludin, A., Awanis, R., et al., 2019. Exploring the role of blended learning for teaching and learning effectiveness in institutions of higher learning: An empirical investigation. Education and Information Technologies. 24(6), 3433–3466.

[6] Wang, L., Vetten, A.D., Admiraal, W., et al., 2024. Relationship between perceived learner control and student engagement in a blended course. Education and Information Technologies. 30, 2463–2484. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12910-w

[7] Fredricks, J.A., Blumenfeld, P.C., Paris, A.H., 2004. School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research. 74(1), 59–109.

[8] Manwaring, K.C., Larsen, R., Graham, C.R., et al., 2017. Investigating student engagement in blended learning settings using experience sampling and structural equation modeling. The Internet and Higher Education. 35, 21–33.

[9] Mohd, I.H., Hussein, N., Aluwi, A., et al., 2016. Enhancing students engagement through blended learning satisfaction and lecturer support. Proceedings of 2016 IEEE 8th International Conference on Engineering Education; 7–8 December 2016; Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. pp. 175–180.

[10] Bruijn-Smolders, M.D., Prinsen, F., 2024. Effective student engagement with blended learning: A systematic review. Heliyon. 10(23), e23251.

[11] Liu, X., He, W., Zhao, L., et al., 2021. Gender Differences in Self-Regulated Online Learning During the COVID-19 Lockdown. Frontiers in Psychology. 12, 595895.

[12] Bru, E., Virtanen, T., Kjetilstad, V., et al., 2019. Gender Differences in the Strength of Association between Perceived Support from Teachers and Student Engagement. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research. 65(1), 153–168.

[13] James, B.H., Jason, N.P., Caroline, H.N., 2019. Predictors of Student Engagement in Learning Communities. Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development. 6, 2382120519840330.

[14] Heilporn, G., Lakhal, S., Bélisle, M., 2021. An examination of teachers' strategies to foster student engagement in blended learning in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education. 18(1), 25.

[15] Najya, A.A., Lubna, B., Yousef, M.I., 2017. The potential effect of technology and distractions on undergraduate students' concentration. Journal of Educational Technology Systems. 33(4), 860–865.

[16] Karakose, T., Tülübaş, T., Papadakis, S., 2022. Revealing the intellectual structure and evolution of digital addiction research: An integrated bibliometric and science mapping approach. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 19(22), 14883.

[17] Tülübaş, T., Karakose, T., Papadakis, S., 2023. A holistic investigation of the relationship between digital addiction and academic achievement among students. European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education. 13(10), 2006–2034.

[18] Bem, S.L., 1981. Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex typing. Psychological Review. 88(4), 354–364.

[19] Bandura, A., 1986. Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA.

[20] Davis, D.F., 1989. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly. 13(3), 319–340.

[21] Huang, R., Ma, D., Zhang, H., 2008. Towards a Design Theory of Blended Learning Curriculum. Proceedings of First International Conference on Hybrid Learning and Education; 13–15 August 2008; Hong Kong, China. pp. 66–78.

[22] Boelens, R., De, B.W., Voet, M., 2017. Four key challenges to the design of blended learning: A systematic literature review. Educational Research Review. 22, 1–18.

[23] Achahbar, A., Khoumssi, K., 2023. A Paradigm switch in higher education learning trend:blended learning. European Journal of Education Studies. 10(1), 241–255.

[24] Mamun, M.A., Lawrie, G., 2023. Student-content interactions: Exploring behavioural engagement with self-regulated inquiry-based online learning modules. Smart Learning Environments. 10, 1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-022-00221-x

[25] Metu, A., 2024. A Literature Review of Student Engagement in Learning Experiences. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.17426.98243

[26] Christothea, H., Bart, R., Avinash, B., et al., 2019. A large-scale implementation of predictive learning analytics in higher education: the teachers' role and perspective. Educational Technology Research and Development. 67, 1273–1306.

[27] Amjaad, M.T., 2024. Digital Active Learning Strategies in Blended Environments to Develop Students' Social and Emotional Learning Skills and Engagement in Higher Education. European Journal of Education. 59(4), e12678.

[28] Cooper, A.A., Clifton, E.G., Feeny, N.C., 2017. An empirical review of potential mediators and mechanisms of prolonged exposure therapy. Clinical Psychology Review. 56, 106–121.

[29] Liu, Y., Ma, S., Chen, Y., 2024. The impacts of learning motivation, emotional engagement and psychological capital on academic performance in a blended learning university course. Frontiers in Psychology. 15, 1234567.

[30] Daniels, L.M., Adams, C., McCaffrey, A., 2016. Chapter 2 - Emotional and Social Engagement in a Massive Open Online Course: An Examination of Dino 101. In: Tettegah, S.Y., Sharon, Y.T. (eds.). Emotions, Technology, and Learning. Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA. pp. 25–41.

[31] Lu, J., Churchill, D., 2012. The effect of social interaction on learning engagement in a social networking environment. Interactive Learning Environments. 22(4), 401–417.

[32] Lavidas, K., Petropoulou, A., Papadakis, S., et al., 2022. Factors affecting response rates of the web survey with teachers. Computers. 11(9), 127.

[33] Seyyed, B.K., Noroozi, O., Khaneh, M.P., 2021. Gender Differences in Engagement and Self-regulation in an Online Constructivist Learning Design and Learning Analytics Environment. Proceedings of the International Conference on Studies in Education and Social Sciences; 15–17 November 2021; Antalya, Turkey. pp. 171–176.

[34] Campos, D.G., Scherer, R., 2023. Digital gender gaps in Students' knowledge, attitudes and skills: an integrative data analysis across 32 Countries. Education and Information Technologies. 29(1), 655–693.

[35] Li, Y., Whitcomb, K., Singh, C., 2020. How learning environment predicts male and female students' physics motivational beliefs in introductory physics courses. Proceedings of the Physics Education Research Conference 2020; 22–23 July 2020; Virtual Conference. pp. 284–290. DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2007.07441

[36] Witter, A., 2021. How COVID-19 is threatening girls' education. ONE. Available from: https://www.one.org/stories/girls-education-crisis-covid-19/ (cited 1 January 2021).

[37] Alma, R., John, S.H., Kasey, R., et al., 2021. Positive attitudinal shifts and a narrowing gender gap: Do expertlike attitudes correlate to higher learning gains for women in the physics classroom? Physical Review Physics Education Research. 17(1), 010101.

[38] Ayite, D.M., Aheto, K.S.P., Nyagorme, P., 2022. Gender dimensions of emerging technologies for learning in a University. Cogent Social Sciences. 8(1), 2071389. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2022.2071389

[39] Kahu, E.R., Nelson, K., 2018. Student engagement in the educational interface: Understanding the mechanisms of student success. Higher Education Research & Development. 37(1), 58–71.

[40] Sterling, A.J., 2018. Student Experiences in the Second Year: Advancing Strategies for Success Beyond the First Year of College. Strategic Enrollment Management Quarterly. 5(4), 136–149.

[41] Thomas, L., Hill, M., O'Mahony, J., et al., 2017. Supporting student success: strategies for institutional change. Higher Education Academy: York, UK.

[42] Nick, Z., Linda, L., 2010. Improving student engagement: Ten proposals for action. Active Learning in Higher Education. 11(3), 167–177.

[43] Korlat, S., Kollmayer, M., Holzer, J., et al., 2021. Gender Differences in Digital Learning During COVID-19: Competence Beliefs, Intrinsic Value, Learning Engagement, and Perceived Teacher Support. Frontiers in Psychology. 12, 637776.

[44] Alqurashi, E., 2019. Predicting student satisfaction and perceived learning within online learning environments. Distance Education. 40(1), 133–148.

[45] Ahmed, E.M., Michael, K., Tony, S., 2013. Blended learning in higher education: Current and future challenges in surveying education. Issues in Educational Research. 23(2), 132–150.

[46] Wendy, W., Alice, E.H., 2012. Biosocial Construction of Sex Differences and Similarities in Behavior. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. 46, 55–123.

[47] Xiong, T., 2023. Research on the Influencing Factors of College Students' Learning Engagement in Live Webcast Teaching [Master's thesis] [in Chinese]. Southwest University: Chongqing, China.

[48] Piaw, C.Y., 2013. Mastering research statistics. McGraw Hill Education: New York, NY, USA.

[49] Ministry of Education, 2021. The guidance of the Ministry of Education and other six departments on promoting the construction of new education infrastructure and building a high-quality education support system [in Chinese]. 360A16-09-2021-0006-1, 8 July 2021.

[50] Zhang, Y.C., Jiang, W.W., Li, H.B., et al., 2025. A comparative study of college students' online and offline learning engagement in the context of digital education [in Chinese]. Journal of Tianjin Agricultural University. 32(2), 56–61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19640/j.cnki.jtau.2025.02.013

[51] Wollast, R., Lüders, A., Nugier, A., et al., 2025. Gender inequality and cultural values in explaining gender differences in positive and negative emotions: A comparison of 24 countries during the COVID-19 pandemic. Current Psychology. 44, 1–19.

[52] Da Xu, L., He, W., Li, S., 2014. Internet of things in industries: A survey. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics. 10(4), 2233–2243.

[53] Zhang, Y.R., Sun, S.R., Li, L.Y., 2025. An Investigation and Study of Promotion Path in Self-efficacy and Learning Engagement among College Students in a Context of Blended Learning [in Chinese]. Journal of Hebei Minzu Normal University. 45(2), 119–127. DOI: https://doi.org/10.16729/j.cnki.jhnun.2025.02.019

Downloads

How to Cite

Di, X., Ma, S., & Lin, C. (2025). The Role of Gender and Year of Study on Learning Engagement in a Blended Learning Context. Forum for Linguistic Studies, 7(7), 112–125. https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i7.9623

Issue

Vol. 7 , Iss. 7 (July 2025): In progress

Article Type

Article

License

Copyright © 2025 Xuan Di, Shuhan Ma, Chaoyu Lin

Creative Commons License

This is an open access article under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) License.