1. 1
Language Centre Cover Sheet
Please fill in all the blanks below for your assignment:
Full Name (in pinyin) Wang Ke English Name (optional) Angela
Student ID Number 1507394 Class (e.g. Y1_BUS_A1) Y1-D1/06
Programme EAP022 Module Code EAP022
Assignment Title
Students’ perceptions of blended learning environment and their preferences
in particular learning environment with respect to academic performance
Submission Deadline 2016/04/29 EAP Tutor’s Name Jennifer Howard
Which draft is this?
(e.g. first draft, final draft)
Final draft
Final Word Count
2407
If you agree to let the University use your work anonymously for teaching and learning
purposes, please type your full name in pinyin again here.
Wang Ke
I certify that I have read and understood the University’s Policy for dealing with Plagiarism, Collusion and the
Fabrication of Data (available on ICE: https://ice.xjtlu.edu.cn/ice/course/view.php?id=1029 ). With reference to this
policy, I certify that:
 My work does not contain any instances of plagiarism and/or collusion.
 My work does not contain any fabricated data.
By uploading my assignment onto ICE, I formally declare that all the above
information is true to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Scoring – For Tutor Use
Stage of
Marking
Initials
TF Features Achieved
LM Features
Achieved
TF
Score
LM
Score
Final
Score
(A-D) (E-J) (A-D) (E-J)

2. 2
1st
- red pen
Moderation –
green pen
The original mark has been accepted by the moderator (please circle as appropriate): Y / N
Data entry and score calculation have been checked by another tutor (please circle): Y
2nd
(if required)
- green pen
For Academic Office Use Possible Academic Dishonesty (please circle as appropriate)
Date Receiv ed Day s Late Late Penalty
Plagiarism:
- Minor
- Major
Collusion
(major)
Data:
- Embellishment
(minor)
- Fabrication (major)
Students: Please start your assignment on the next page.

3. 3
Students’ perceptions of blended learning environment and their preferences in particular
learning environment with respect to academic performance
Abstract
This research aims to investigate students’ perceptions of blended learning environment and
their preferences in particular learning environment with respect to academic performance. The
research was conducted on Year one students in an international university. A questionnaire
was applied to collect data. Results show students were satisfied with blended learning
environment for easier access to learning materials, increased interaction and more solid course
understanding, but remarked negatively on engagement. Also, evidence revealed that students’
preferences had minor relationship with their academic performance, but differed according to
learning patterns. In particular, students’ help-seeking behavior changes under blended learning
environment in a complicated way. Therefore, the university could help enhance students’
learning strategies and self-regulation to prepare them to adapt to blended learning
environment.
Introduction
Background:
The universal use of technology has unavoidably impacted higher education system, offering
new pedagogical approaches for learners through online resources (Ioannou et al., 2015).
Therefore, in most universities, where students are supported by web-based instruction out of
class and are meanwhile involved in synchronous face-to-face learning environment, an
integration of online learning environment (OLE) and traditional face-to-face learning
environment (FLE), also referred to as blended learning environment (BLE) is flourishing
(Farley, Jain & Thomson, 2011 cited in Owston, York & Murtha, 2012).
According to Chang and Fisher (2003 cited in Gecer, 2013), students’ satisfaction level in
learning environment is significant for them to acquire knowledge. Also, since students start
forming their learning habits once they enter a new environment, their first year in the

4. 4
university would lay the foundation for their following study (Huon et al., 2007). Hence, the
investigation into students’ perspectives of learning environments can be advisory comments for
the university to provide necessary support for students.
Published research has demonstrated that students have greater satisfaction with blended
learning environment due to its advantages combined with online and face-to-face learning,
including increased flexibility, abundance of learning materials, and higher learner autonomy
(Farley, Jain & Thomson, 2011 cited in Owston, York & Murtha, 2013). Nonetheless, some
experts argued technology use in university might hinder the implementation of pedagogies.
Bliuc et al. (2011) proposed that students tend to think in a more critical way in face-to-face
learning than in online learning, because they appear to consider online discussion as a required
task but not a valued learning component.
Also, since most Chinese students are only exposed to face-to-face learning environment in
their earlier study experience, the shift of learning environment can produce changes in their
learning patterns and practices especially with the increase of technology use in education
(Huon et al., 2007). Academic help-seeking is acknowledged to be a useful learning strategy
positively related to students’ academic performance, but prior study indicated that university
students avoid using it in face-to-face learning environment, mainly because seeking help might
be perceived as lack of competence. Such concern would be relieved under OLE, so it is
reasonable to hypothesize students’ help-seeking behavior would change under OLE (Dabbagh
& Kitsantas, 2004).
On the basis of the consensus of experts that students’ attitudes towards learning environment
essentially influence the efficacy of learning, students’ perspectives should be taken seriously
(Akkoyunlu & Soylu, 2008). The research was conducted in Xi’an Jiao-tong Liverpool University
(XJTLU). XJTLU is an international joint university founded by Xi’an Jiao-tong University and the
University of Liverpool. Students here receive western education mode and can enjoy a
relatively more relaxing study atmosphere.

5. 5
Aims and hypotheses:
Described in this paper is a research aiming at analyzing XJTLU Year1 students’ perspectives of
blended learning environment and their preferences in particular learning environment with
respect to academic performance.
Three hypotheses are made in this study:
1. High academic achievers are more satisfied with blended learning environment.
2. Online learning environment is more accepted for high achievers to grasp knowledge
and interact with others.
3. Low achievers prefer online learning environment when they seek help.
Method
Sample:
The research was conducted in Xi’an Jiao-tong Liverpool University. 25 respondents were
randomly chosen and were all Year1 Chinese students who mainly experienced face-to-face
learning environment before they entered the university. 15 students scoring higher than 70
last semester were classified into high achievers and nine scoring lower than 70 were seen as
low achievers.
Materials:
The questionnaire (see appendix) containing three parts and 16 items was designed to carry
out the research. There were one demographic question, six Likert-style questions, three
dichotomous questions and six multiple choices questions. Questions in first part included
students’ perceptions of convenience, course understanding, interaction with tutors and
students, and engagement under BLE, all of which were factors that might affect students’
perspectives of learning environment (Poon, 2012). The second part investigated students’
preferences in particular learning environment for different learning patterns, including self-
study, tutorials and collaboration with peers. The last part was concerned students’ opinions on
help-seeking.

6. 6
Procedure:
The questionnaire was piloted before it was applied to use. By face-to-face interviewing, flaws
in the questionnaire were revealed. For example, without providing necessary background
information, respondents’ choices for preferred learning environment might not base on the
intention of improving academic performance, but of ridding suppression. The questionnaire
was modified basing on feedbacks collected in piloting.
Respondents were interviewed face-to-face and were given the explanation of each learning
environment in advance to avoid misunderstanding, then data were collected and analyzed
using EXCEL and presented in the form of tables, figures and verbal descriptions.
Results
Hypothesis1:
Students’ satisfaction of blended learning environment was evaluated by answering five-point
Likert-type questions in four aspects: convenience in acquiring learning materials, course
understanding, interaction with tutors and students and engagement. Table1 shows the
percentages of students’ choices. Except for engagement, students’ perspectives towards other
three aspects were mainly positive, which partly confirmed the hypotheses. Data revealed
unobvious differences between choices of high and low achievers. It is possible to imply that
generally XJTLU Year1 students were satisfied with blended learning environment regardless of
academic performances.
Convenience Course
understanding
Interaction Engagement
Percentage
Choices
High
achievers
Low
achievers
High
achievers
Low
achievers
High
achievers
Low
achievers
High
achievers
Low
achievers
Strongly
agree
73% 78% 13% 19% 33% 44% 0 0
Agree 27% 22% 80% 73% 60% 48% 0 0
Nurture 0 0 7% 8% 7% 8% 7% 11%
Disagree 0 0 0 0 0 0 73% 78%
Strongly
disagree
0 0 0 0 0 0 20% 11%

7. 7
Table1: Students’ perceptions of different aspects of blended learning environment
Hypothesis2:
The questionnaire asked about students’ preferred learning environment for self-study, tutorials
and collaboration with peers. Overall, about two thirds of students for both high and low
achievers believed that self-study under OLE rather than lectures under FLE contributed more
to their grasp of knowledge. Further to self-study, Figure1 illustrates the percentages of
students’ habits of independent study under OLE. 67% high achievers reported that they
usually accelerated their learning paces by online resources, and so did 65% low achievers.
Correspondingly, those using online tools also had a habit of further study online out of class.
Figure1: Independent study under OLE
Students’ choices were quite reverse for attending tutorials. 14 out of 15 high achievers and
eight out of nine low achievers preferred face-to-face tutorials. In addition, all respondents said
they would prefer FLE to collaborate with peers. The difference of choices between high and
low achievers was not obvious, but apparently their choices changed with different learning
patterns, which negated the hypothesis.
accelerating learning paces
using online resources
further study using online
resources
high achievers (15 in total) 67% 67%
low achievers (9 in total) 65% 65%
67% 67%65% 65%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
IndependentstudyunderOLE
high achievers (15 in total) low achievers (9 in total)

8. 8
Students’ perceptions of self-regulation was similar to that of engagement. Figure2 illustrates
over a half respondents for both high and low achievers disagreed with better self-regulation
under OLE. The coincidence between students’ self-regulation and engagement might indicated
some links.
Figure2: Students’ perceptions of gaining better self-regulation under OLE
Hypothesis3:
24 out of 25 respondents believed the positive effect on their academic performance of seeking
help from tutors, nonetheless, the frequency of help-seeking failed to raise correspondently.
Figure3 depicts the percentages of students’ frequency of seeking help, in which outer and
inner circles represents low and high achievers respectively. 47% high achievers and 44% low
achievers sought help from tutors face-to-face more than once a week, and a substantial
portion of students never asked for help. Moreover, only five respondents considered it easier
to express questions clearly in an online format.
strongly
agree
6%
agree
24%
neutral
18%disagree
10%
strongly
disagree
42%
PERCEPTIONS OF SELF-
REGULATION UNDER OLE FOR
HIGH ACHIEVERS
strongly
agree
11%
agree
0%
neutral
24%
disagree
12%
strongly
disagree
53%
PERCEPTIONS OF SELF-
REGULATION UNDER OLE FOR
LOW ACHIEVERS

9. 9
Figure3: Percentages of students’ frequency of seeking help
Figure4 illustrates some factors that might influence help-seeking behavior and the percentages
of students who would consider them before seeking help. Both high and low achievers cared
much about promptness, convenience, and the credibility of answers. Contrary to earlier
research, only 13% of high achievers and a slight more for low achievers, 22%, worried about
others’ opinions. Seemingly threat of being perceived as incompetent is not what impedes
students to seek help, but from the data it is difficult to explain why students avoid seek help.
47%
33%
7%
13%
44%
22%
22%
12%
Frequency of seeking help fromtutors
at least once a week
about once a week
about once a semester
never
Outercircle:Low achievers
Innercircle:Highachievers

10. 10
Figure4: Percentages of respondents who will consider these factors when seeking help
Discussion
Results pertaining to students’ opinions of blended learning environment both negate and
support the first hypothesis. Students were satisfied with easier access to learning materials,
better course understanding and interaction with tutors and students under BLE, and
engagement was the only exception. While the results contradict to the mainstream viewpoints
on students’ engagement in BLE, in fact it is possible that students show lower participation
under OLE than FLE (Caspi, Chajut & Saporta, 2008). In this research, students’ choices were
made based on the comparison between FLE which they experienced in high school and BLE
which they are currently exposed to, thus, the enhancement of technology use in learning could
be challenging for Year1 students. Students might encounter problems like independent
learning or simply lacking in necessary computer literacy skills, consequently failing to get
involved in online or blended courses (Banerjee, 2011). Additionally, Sun and Rueda (2012)
maintained that students’ self-regulation was closely correlated to their engagement, so
students’ negative remarks on self-regulation under OLE could explain their discontent of
engagement.
promptness convenience
credibility of
answers
worries about
others'
opinions
high achievers (15 in total) 60% 80% 58% 13%
low achievers (9 in total) 56% 78% 56% 22%
60%
80%
58%
13%
56%
78%
56%
22%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
percentage
Factors
Percentage of respondentswhowillconsiderthese factorswhen
seekinghelp
high achievers (15 in total) low achievers (9 in total)

11. 11
With respect to the second research question dealing with students’ preferences in particular
learning environment, evidence show that students’ preferences appeared to have minor
connection with their academic performance, but to be related to learning patterns. Students
preferred an online learning environment for independent study, while face-to-face learning
environment seemed to be more accepted for tutorials and collaboration with peers. Published
resources have demonstrated that in today’s higher education system, the role of tutors has
evolved from a knowledge-impactor to a guide who follows and facilitates students’ learning
process (Gecer, 2013). In consistence with the statement, results show that students
overwhelmingly attributed their grasp of knowledge to self-study under OLE rather than lectures
under FLE, which seemingly reveals a transition from teacher-centered learning to student-
centered learning. It is demonstrated by Chen et al. (2015) that unlike teacher-centered
learning where students passively absorb knowledge, student-centered learning requires
students to be equipped with critical thinking, and it can also enhance students’ intrinsic
motivation. Moreover, the literature suggested that blended learning environment can promote
self-paced and self-directed learning (Tomas et al., 2015). These assumptions could interpret
why a high portion of respondents reported that they would further their study and adjust
learning paces through online resources.
Students’ preference in FLE for tutorials aligns with previous research reporting that face-to-
face tutorials are helpful in strengthening students’ learning ability and addressing their
problems (Smyth et al., 2012). Nevertheless, students’ perception towards collaboration with
peers under OLE was contradictory to most statements that students would take positive
attitudes to collaborative learning in an online-supported learning environment (Azis, 2013). It
seems fair to say that both tutorials and collaboration with peers can be regarded as interaction
with others. Lack of self-regulation revealed in the results could be the reason why students
prefer interaction under FLE over OLE, as Cho and Kim (2013) claimed that self-regulation is
required to attain effective interaction in an online setting. Furthermore, according to Cho and
Kim (2013), instructors’ scaffolding can significantly impact students’ self-regulation of
interaction under online environment, but in this experiment it is uncertain to imply whether
tutors gave sufficient scaffolding in students’ interaction process. In all, it is indicated that
students’ choices for preferred learning environment reflect their intention for better academic

12. 12
performance by matching their personalized learning styles and avoiding environment that
might hinder their progress (Clayton, Blumberg & Auld, 2010).
Results for the last research question dealing with students’ preferred learning environment
when seeking help suggested that both high and low achievers realized the positive influence of
help-seeking but avoided seeking help under either learning environment. Earlier study set on
conventional learning environment demonstrated that students fear their need for help would
appear inferior to their peers (Dunn, Rakes & Rakes, 2014). This could explain that a higher
percentage of low achievers thought others’ opinions could be decisive factors when they
attempted to seek help. Nevertheless, it cannot fully explain the behavior of respondents in this
study since for both high and low achievers, worries about peers’ opinions when seeking help is
the last they would consider among four provided factors. Furthermore, communication
techniques under OLE allow students seek help covertly, which partly reduce students’ concern
for embarrassment. However, it generates a problem that expressing questions in an online
environment could not be as easy as that with the help of instructors face-to-face, which was
verified in this research (Mahasneh, Sowan & Nassar, 2012). Also, Dunn, Rakes and Rakes
(2014) have found that self-regulation has positive association with academic help-seeking for
both online and traditional learning. Students’ negative comment on their self-regulation might
be responsible for their reluctance of seeking help as well.
Conclusion
Summary:
In this research, students’ perspectives of blended learning environment and preferences in
particular learning environment were examined with respect to academic performance. Three
hypotheses are: 1) High academic achievers are more satisfied with blended learning
environment; 2) High achievers prefer online learning environment in the process of grasping
knowledge; 3) Online learning environment is more accepted for lower achievers to seek help
for higher academic performance.

13. 13
Results suggested that overall both high and low achievers were satisfied with BLE except for
engagement. Also, students’ preferences appeared unobvious connection with academic
performance, but could be related to learning patterns. Corresponding choices of preferred
learning environment were made to match students’ learning styles and optimize their learning
efficacy for different learning patterns. In particular, the evidence implied that although online
environment provides a means of both convenience and promptness that students value much,
it seemed not to critically increase the frequency of students’ help-seeking behavior.
Final comments:
An implication of this research is that while generally students are satisfied with blended
learning environment, for most students, the problem is low self-regulation under an online
environment. Therefore, it is suggested the cultivation of students’ self-regulation should be
emphasized by the university. Also, the university could provide training about computer skills
to ease the difficulty in adaptation of online learning for students. Since it is noticeable that
students’ self-regulation greatly affects their perspectives and behavior, further research should
be done to investigate the relationship.
Limitations:
However, this conclusion is tempered by several limitations. First, the sample size of students
was not large enough to obtain a widely common conclusion. Second, it is not clear whether
students reported their grades honestly because some students might consider the question
about their academic performance sensitive. Third, this research focuses only on how students
with different academic performance perceived on learning environments, so it is possible that
students’ practical action fails to correspond with their opinions. Any of these factors may
influence the objectivity and accuracy of this research.
References
Akkoyunlu, B.& Soylu, M.Y. (2008) ‘A study of student's perceptions in a blended learning
environment based on different learning styles’, Educational Technology & Society, 11(1),
pp.183-193.

14. 14
Azis, Y.M. (2013) 'the Effectiveness of Blended Learning', Prior Knowledge, 2(2), pp.106–116.
Banerjee, G. (2011) ‘Blended Environments: Learning Effectiveness and Student Satisfaction at
a Small College in Transition’, Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 15(1) pp.8-19.
Bliuc, A.M., Ellis, R.A., Goodyear, P. & Piggotte, L. (2011) ‘A blended learning Approach to
teaching foreign policy: Student experiences of learning through face-to-face and online
discussion and their relationship to academic performance’, Computers and Education,
56(3), pp.856–864.
Caspi, A., Chajut, E. & Saporta, K. (2008) ‘Participation in class and in online discussions:
Gender differences’, Computers and Education, 50(3), pp.718-724.
Chen, J. et al. (2015) ‘A new approach for laboratory exercise of pathophysiology in China
based on student-centered learning’, Advances in physiology education, 39(2), pp.116–
119.
Cho, M.& Kim, B. (2013) ‘Students' self-regulation for interaction with others in online learning
environments’, Internet and Higher Education, 17(1), pp.69-75.
Clayton, K., Blumberg, F. & Auld, D.P. (2010) ‘The relationship between motivation, learning
strategies and choice of environment whether traditional or including an online
component’, British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(3), pp.349–364.
Dabbagh, N.& Kitsantas, A. (2004) 'Supporting Self-Regulation in Student-Centered Web-Based
Learning Environments ', International Journal on E-Learning, 3(1), pp.40-47.
Dunn, K.E., Rakes, G.C.& Rakes, T.A. (2014) ' Influence of academic self-regulation, critical
thinking, and age on online graduate students’ academic help-seeking', Distance
Education, 35(1), pp.75-89.
Gecer, A. (2013) 'Lecturer-Student Communication in Blended Learning Environments',
Educational Consultancy and Research Center, 13(1), pp.362-367.
Huon, G., Spehar, G., Adam, P.& Rifkin, W. (2007) 'Resource use and academic performance
among first year psychology students', Higher Education, 53(1), pp.1-27.
Ioannou, A. et al. (2015) ‘Creative Multimodal Learning Environments and Blended Interaction
for Problem-Based Activity in HCI Education’, TechTrends, 59(2), pp.47-56.

15. 15
Mahasneh, R.A., Sowan, A.K. & Nassar, Y.H. (2012) ‘Academic Help-Seeking in Online and
Face-to-Face Learning Environments’, E-Learning and Digital Media, 9(2) pp.196-210.
Owston, R., York, D. & Murtha, S. (2013) ‘Student Perceptions and Achievement in a University
Blended Learning Strategic Initiative’, Internet and Higher Education, 18, pp.38-46.
Poon, J. (2012) ‘Use of blended learning to enhance the student learning experience and
engagement in property education’, Property Management, 30, pp.129–156.
Smyth, S., Houghton, C., Cooney, A.& Casey, D. (2012) ‘Students' experiences of blended
learning across a range of postgraduate programs’, Nurse Education Today, 32(4), pp.464–
468.
Sun, J.C.-Y. & Rueda, R. (2012) ‘Situational interest, computer self-efficacy and self-regulation:
Their impact on student engagement in distance education’, British Journal of Educational
Technology, 43, pp.191-204.
Tomas, L., Lasen, M., Field, E. & Skamp, K. (2015) ‘Promoting Online Students' Engagement
and Learning in Science and Sustainability Preservice Teacher Education’, Australian Journal
of Teacher Education, 40(11) pp.78-107.
Appendix: Questionnaire
Definition: Online learning environment (OLE) includes various online resources both in
campus like online library, online homework, online discussion board and email and out of
campus like MOOC, TED and GOOGLE. Face-to-face learning environment (FLE) focuses on
physical interaction including lectures, tutorials, visiting tutors’ offices for help and so on.
Blended learning environment is a combination of OLE and FLE.
Scores of your major course in last semester:
0-70□ 70-100□
1. I think it is more convenient to acquire learning materials under BLE.
Strongly agree□ Agree□ Neutral□ Disagree□ Strongly disagree□
2. I think I can get more solid understanding of my course content under BLE.
Strongly agree□ Agree□ Neutral□ Disagree□ Strongly disagree□
3. I think the increase of interaction with tutors and students has positive effect on my
academic performance.

16. 16
Strongly agree□ Agree□ Neutral□ Disagree□ Strongly disagree□
4. I feel like my amount of interaction with tutors and other students increased under BLE.
Strongly agree□ Agree□ Neutral□ Disagree□ Strongly disagree□
5. I feel more engaged under BLE.
Strongly agree□ Agree□ Neutral□ Disagree□ Strongly disagree□
6. Which do you think contributes more to your understanding of course content?
Lectures under face-to-face learning environment□ Self-study mainly under online
environment□
7. Which learning environment do you prefer to collaborate with peers?
Online□ Face-to-face□ No preference□
8. In order to improve your academic achievement, which learning environment do you prefer
to attend tutorials?
Online□ Face-to-face□ No preference□
9. Do you have a habit of further study through resources out of class like MOOC, GOOGLE?
Yes□ No□
10. Do you use online resources to accelerate your learning process?
Yes□ No□ Usually I cannot exceed the arranged process□
11. Under OLE, I think I gain a better self-regulation compared with FLE.
Strongly agree□ Agree□ Neutral□ Disagree□ Strongly disagree□
12. I think seeking help from tutors help me get better academic performance.
Yes□ No□
13. How often do you seek help from your tutor face-to-face?
At least once a week□ Once a month□ Once a semester□ Never□
14. Do you think it easier to express your question clearly through emails or online discussion
in writing form?
Yes□ No□
15. Which factors do you think should be considered when you seek for help?
Promptness□ Convenience□ Credibility of answers□ Worry about others opinions□