Design approach to blended learning in teaching EFL for Indonesian university students

Nila Kurnia Sari, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, Indonesia


With the rapidly increasing involvement of technology in the teaching and learning process in higher education, lecturers are constantly on the lookout for better ways to integrate technology into their classes. Blended learning emerged in 2000 and has been one of the most popular approaches to teaching EFL. Despite having been around for years, not many people fully understand the principle behind it and how to design an effective blended course. Such is the case in most higher education institutions in Indonesia. This article reports on the result of a survey-based research in which the aim was to investigate how EFL lecturers in Yogyakarta State University, Indonesia design their blended courses. As many as 9 lecturers were involved as respondents in an online survey, an interview, and documents inspection. The data from the survey were then analyzed using two major theories of blended learning design approach by Lai, M., Lam, K. M., & Lim, C. P. (2016) and Alammary, Sheard, and Carbone (2014). The findings revealed that EFL lecturers designed their blended learning based on the principle of extension by Lai, M., Lam, K. M., & Lim, C. P. (2016) and the low-impact model Alammary, Sheard, and Carbone (2014) was preferred to the other models.


EFL; blended learning; design approach; higher education

Full Text:



Alammary, A., Sheard, J., & Carbone, A. (2014). Blended learning in higher education: Three different design approaches. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 30(4).

Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2010). Class Differences: Online Education in the United States, 2010. Sloan Consortium (NJ1).

Davies, R. S., Dean, D. L., & Ball, N. (2013). Flipping the classroom and instructional technology integration in a college-level information systems spreadsheet course. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61(4), 563-580.

Graham, C. R. (2006). Blended learning systems. The handbook of blended learning, 3-21.

Graham, C. R., Woodfield, W., & Harrison, J. B. (2013). A framework for institutional adoption and implementation of blended learning in higher education. The internet and higher education, 18, 4-14.

Guan, C., Ding, D., & Ho, K. W. (2015). E-Learning in higher education for adult learners in Singapore. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 5(5), 348.

Harrington, A. M. (2010). Problematizing the Hybrid Classroom for ESL/EFL Students. Tesl-Ej, 14(3), n3.

Kaleta, R., Skibba, K., & Joosten, T. (2007). Discovering, designing, and delivering hybrid courses. Blended learning: Research perspectives, 111143.

Lai, M., Lam, K. M., & Lim, C. P. (2016). Design principles for the blend in blended learning: a collective case study. Teaching in Higher Education, 21(6), 716-729.

Oliver, M., & Trigwell, K. (2005). Can ‘blended learning’be redeemed?. E-learning and Digital Media, 2(1), 17-26.

Picciano, A. G. (2009). Blending with purpose: The multimodal model. Journal of asynchronous learning networks, 13(1), 7-18.

Sahin-Kizil, A. (2014). Blended instruction for EFL learners: Engagement, learning and course satisfaction. JALT CALL Journal, 10(3), 175-188.

Singh, H. (2003). Building effective blended learning programs. Educational Technology-Saddle Brook Then Englewood Cliffs NJ-, 43(6), 51-54.

Wright, P., & Wright, G. (2011). Using Moodle to enhance Thai language learning: Instructor and learner perspectives. The Journal of Kanda University of International Studies, 23, 375–398.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2020 Lingua Pedagogia, Journal of English Teaching Studies

Our Journal has been Indexed by:


Supervised by:

RJI Main logo


 View My Stats

 Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.