Offia Tugwell Owo
2025 VOL. 12, No. 3
Abstract: This study investigated the effects of blended learning approaches on technical education students' achievement in electronic laboratory workshop technology at Rivers State University, Nigeria. A quasi-experimental research design was employed with a sample of 68 undergraduate students enrolled in a technology education course. The experimental group (n = 34) received instruction through a blended learning approach combining traditional face-to-face methods with online learning components, while the control group (n = 34) received conventional face-to-face instruction only. Data collection utilised an Electronic Laboratory Achievement Test (ELAT) administered as both pre-test and post-test instruments. Analysis through t-test statistics revealed that students exposed to blended learning demonstrated significantly higher achievement scores (p < 0.05) compared to those taught using traditional methods. Furthermore, no significant gender-based differences in achievement were observed among students in the blended learning environment. The findings suggest that blended learning approaches offer substantial benefits for technical education, particularly in enhancing practical laboratory skills acquisition in electronic workshop technology. Thus, one recommendation, amongst others, is for the integration of blended learning methodologies into technical education curricula and the provision of adequate technological infrastructure.
Keywords: blended learning, technical education, electronic laboratory, workshop technology, student achievement, higher education, Nigeria
The rapidly evolving technological landscape has significantly transformed educational practices worldwide, with particular implications for technical and vocational education (Al-Samarraie & Saeed, 2018). As higher education institutions seek to enhance educational outcomes while addressing resource constraints, blended learning has emerged as a promising instructional approach that combines traditional face-to-face classroom methods with online learning activities (Garrison & Kanuka, 2004; Graham, 2006). This integration of digital and traditional pedagogical methods holds particular promise for technical education programmes, where practical laboratory experiences remain crucial for skills development (Yen & Lee, 2011).
Technical education, particularly in electronic laboratory workshop technology, presents unique challenges and opportunities for educational innovation. The field requires both theoretical understanding and hands-on practical skills, making it an ideal candidate for blended learning approaches that can enhance both aspects of learning (Makinde et al., 2020). In developing countries like Nigeria, where technological resources might be limited, effectively integrating technology into technical education could potentially address issues such as overcrowded workshops, insufficient laboratory equipment, and limited instructional time (Ogbuanya & Onele, 2018).
Rivers State University in Port Harcourt, Nigeria, like many institutions in developing nations, faces significant challenges in delivering high-quality technical education amid resource constraints and increasing student enrollment (Okoye et al., 2021). Electronic laboratory workshop courses, essential components of technical education programmes, require substantial resources and specialised instruction. Given these challenges, investigating the potential of blended learning to enhance student achievement in electronic laboratory workshop technology is particularly relevant.
Despite the critical importance of electronic laboratory workshop technology in technical education curricula, Nigerian universities continue to face substantial challenges in delivering effective instruction in this domain. These challenges include inadequate laboratory facilities, overcrowded workshops, insufficient contact hours, and limited opportunities for individualised instruction (Ezenwoke et al., 2016; Okoye et al., 2021). Consequently, students often graduate with theoretical knowledge but insufficient practical skills, leading to a significant skills gap between educational outcomes and industry requirements (Ogbuanya & Onele, 2018).
Traditional face-to-face instruction, while valuable for demonstrating practical skills, is constrained by physical and temporal limitations that restrict students' access to equipment and instructional support (Makinde et al., 2020). Furthermore, the conventional approach often struggles to accommodate diverse learning paces and styles, potentially disadvantaging students who require additional time or alternative approaches to master complex electronic concepts and procedures (Kintu et al., 2017).
Meanwhile, although blended learning has shown promise in various educational contexts globally, empirical evidence regarding its effectiveness specifically for electronic laboratory workshop technology in Nigerian universities remains scarce. The question of whether and how blended learning approaches might enhance student achievement in this specialised domain within the Nigerian context requires systematic investigation.
Therefore, this study addresses the critical need to explore innovative instructional approaches that could potentially overcome the limitations of traditional methods while enhancing student achievement in electronic laboratory workshop technology at Rivers State University, Port Harcourt.
The significance of this study lies in its potential to inform instructional design and educational policy in technical education programmes, particularly within the Nigerian context. By providing empirical evidence on the effectiveness of blended learning in enhancing student achievement in electronic laboratory workshop courses, this research could guide institutions in optimising instructional approaches and resource allocation to improve educational outcomes.
The primary aim of this study was to investigate the effects of blended learning approaches on technical education students' achievement in electronic laboratory workshop technology at Rivers State University, Port Harcourt. Specifically, the study sought to:
This study was guided by the following research questions:
Based on the research questions, the following null hypotheses were formulated and tested at a 0.05 level of significance:
H₀₁: There is no significant difference in mean achievement scores between students taught electronic laboratory workshop technology using blended learning approaches and those taught using traditional face-to-face methods.
H₀₂: There is no significant difference in mean achievement scores between male and female students taught electronic laboratory workshop technology using blended learning approaches.
Numerous studies have investigated the effectiveness of blended learning across various educational contexts. In higher education generally, meta-analyses have indicated that blended learning approaches often yield better outcomes than either fully online or fully face-to-face instruction (Means et al., 2013; Bernard et al., 2014). For instance, Al-Qahtani and Higgins (2013) found that blended learning produced significantly higher achievement scores compared to e-learning and traditional instruction. In technical and vocational education specifically, research has shown promising results for blended approaches. Yen and Lee (2011) found that the blended approach significantly enhanced both theoretical knowledge and practical performance. Similarly, Akçayır and Akçayır (2018) found mostly positive outcomes across various disciplines, including the engineering and technical fields with blended learning. Within the Nigerian context, Ogbuanya and Onele (2018) revealed significantly higher achievement among students in the blended learning group compared to those in the traditional instruction group. While research on blended learning has proliferated globally, studies specifically examining its effectiveness in technical education contexts in Sub-Saharan Africa remain limited (Garrison & Vaughan, 2013; Kintu et al., 2017). This research gap is therefore particularly pronounced regarding electronic laboratory workshop technology education in Nigerian universities. As a result, this study aims to address this gap by empirically investigating the effects of blended learning approaches on student achievement in electronic laboratory workshop technology at Rivers State University.
The study is anchored in two complementary theoretical frameworks: Constructivist Learning Theory and the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM).
Constructivism posits that learners construct knowledge through experiences and reflection rather than passively receiving information (Piaget, 1971; Vygotsky, 1978). In technical education, constructivist approaches emphasise active experimentation, problem-solving, and collaborative learning, which are key aspects that can be effectively facilitated through blended learning environments (Huang, 2002). According to Dewey (1938), learning occurs through the reconstruction of experience, which aligns with the hands-on, experiential nature of electronic laboratory work. Blended learning, with its combination of face-to-face practical activities and online theoretical components, provides multiple avenues for students to construct knowledge through various experiences (Garrison & Kanuka, 2004).
Developed by Davis (1989), TAM explains how users come to accept and use technology based on perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use. In the context of blended learning in technical education, TAM provides a framework for understanding factors influencing students' engagement with and acceptance of technological components of instruction (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000). Studies have shown that students' perceptions of technology usefulness significantly influence their engagement and subsequent learning outcomes in blended environments (Al-Busaidi, 2013). Thus, with the help of technology, embraced by students of both genders, blended learning, which has the elements of both traditional face-to-face interactions and online learning, brings about improvement in the achievement of students in electronic laboratory workshop technology.
Together, these theories provide a comprehensive framework for understanding how blended learning might enhance student achievement in electronic laboratory workshop technology by facilitating active knowledge construction while addressing factors that influence technology acceptance.
Blended learning combines traditional face-to-face instruction with online learning components, creating an integrated instructional approach that leverages the strengths of both modalities (Garrison & Vaughan, 2008). According to Graham (2006), blended learning can be conceptualised at different levels: the activity level, course level, programme level, or institutional level. At the course level, which is the focus of this study, blended learning involves redesigning instructional components to optimise student engagement and learning outcomes through appropriate integration of face-to-face and online activities.
Various models of blended learning have been proposed, including the flipped classroom model, rotation model, and flex model (Horn & Staker, 2015). In technical education, blended approaches often incorporate online theoretical content, virtual simulations, and face-to-face laboratory practice (Makinde et al., 2020). The flexibility of blended learning allows for customisation based on specific course objectives, available resources, and student needs (Porter et al., 2014).
Technical education encompasses instructional programmes designed to develop occupational competencies and practical skills for various technical fields (Ogbuanya & Onele, 2018). Electronic laboratory workshop technology, a crucial component of technical education programmes, focuses on developing practical skills in electronics through hands-on laboratory experiences (Ezenwoke et al., 2016).
Traditional approaches to teaching electronic laboratory workshops typically involve demonstration-practice methods, where instructors demonstrate procedures that students subsequently practise under supervision (Ogbuanya & Onele, 2018). While effective for skills development, these methods face challenges including limited instructional time, insufficient equipment, and difficulties in accommodating diverse learning paces (Okoye et al., 2021).
Student achievement in technical education encompasses both theoretical knowledge and practical skills development (Yen & Lee, 2011). In electronic laboratory workshop technology, achievement measures typically include cognitive understanding of electronic principles, procedural knowledge of laboratory techniques, and demonstrated competence in practical applications (Ezenwoke et al., 2016). Regarding gender differences in technical education achievement, research findings have been mixed. Some studies have reported gender disparities in achievement, particularly in STEM fields (Oluwafemi et al., 2018), while others have found no significant gender differences in blended learning environments (Kintu et al., 2017). Similarly, Makinde et al. (2020) found that a blended learning approach enhanced student performance in computer programming courses at a Nigerian polytechnic. Ogbuanya and Onele (2018) found that, while males generally performed better in electrical electronics courses, the achievement gap was reduced in blended learning environments.
Factors influencing student achievement in technical education include instructional methods, learning resources, student characteristics, and learning environment (Kintu et al., 2017). Studies have indicated that interactive, student-centred approaches that integrate theory with practice tend to enhance student achievement in technical fields (Ogbuanya & Onele, 2018).
This study employed a quasi-experimental research design, specifically the non-randomised control group pre-test-post-test design. This design was chosen due to the inability to randomly assign students to experimental and control groups within the existing administrative structure of the university. The design can be represented as:
Where O₁ and O₃ represent pre-test observations, X represents the treatment (blended learning approach), and O₂ and O₄ represent post-test observations.The non-random assignment of participants to experimental and control groups introduces potential selection bias and threatens internal validity. Although efforts were made to ensure comparable demographic characteristics between groups, unmeasured differences between participants might have influenced the outcomes. The use of intact classes as experimental units might have resulted in differential characteristics between groups that could confound the results. To mitigate these threats, pre-test scores were used as covariates in the analysis, and group equivalence was verified through demographic comparisons and baseline achievement measures.
The population for this study comprised all undergraduate students enrolled in electronic laboratory workshop technology courses in the Department of Technical Education at Rivers State University, Port Harcourt, during the 2023/2024 academic session. A total of 68 students participated in the study, with 34 students in the experimental group and 34 students in the control group. The groups were formed based on existing class arrangements, with efforts made to ensure comparable demographic characteristics between groups.
The sample consisted of 42 male (61.8%) and 26 female (38.2%) students, with ages ranging from 19 to 27 years (M = 22.4, SD = 1.8). All participants were in their third year of study in the technical education programme and had comparable prior academic performance in electronic-related courses.
The primary instrument used for data collection was the Electronic Laboratory Achievement Test (ELAT), developed by the researcher. ELAT consisted of 50 items divided into two sections: Section A comprised 30 multiple-choice questions assessing theoretical knowledge of electronic principles and laboratory procedures, while Section B included 20 practical task-oriented questions requiring students to demonstrate procedural knowledge and analytical skills.
Content validity of the ELAT was established through review by a panel of five experts in electronic technology education and educational measurement. The instrument was pilot-tested with 20 students not included in the main study. Reliability analysis using Kuder-Richardson Formula 20 (KR-20) yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.83, indicating high internal consistency.
The study was conducted over a 10-week period during the first semester of the 2023/2024 academic session. Both groups covered identical content from the electronic laboratory workshop technology curriculum, including circuit design, component testing, signal analysis, and troubleshooting techniques.
Control Group
Students in the control group received traditional face-to-face instruction, consisting of classroom lectures, instructor demonstrations, and supervised laboratory practice sessions. Instruction followed the conventional approach typically used in the department, with students attending three-hour laboratory sessions twice weekly.
Experimental Group
Students in the experimental group experienced a blended learning approach that combined face-to-face instruction with online learning components. The blended model included:
Students in the experimental group attended one three-hour face-to-face laboratory session weekly, with the remaining instructional time allocated to online and virtual learning activities.
Both groups were administered the ELAT as a pre-test prior to the experimental treatment to establish baseline knowledge, and as a post-test after the 10-week instructional period to measure achievement. To minimise testing effects, the post-test included equivalent but not identical items to those in the pre-test.
Data were analysed using both descriptive and inferential statistics. Descriptive statistics including means, standard deviations, and mean differences were calculated to summarise the achievement patterns. Inferential analysis employed independent samples t-tests to test the null hypotheses at a 0.05 significance level. Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) was used with pre-test scores as covariates to control for initial differences between groups. Effect sizes were calculated using Cohen's d to determine the practical significance of observed differences. All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 26.0.
Table 1 presents the descriptive statistics for pre-test and post-test scores of students in both experimental and control groups.
Table 1: Descriptive Statistics of Pre-test and Post-test Scores
Source: Field activity on blended learning, 2024
Note: Values represent Mean (Standard Deviation)
As shown in Table 1, both groups had comparable pre-test scores, indicating similar baseline knowledge. After the instructional period, the experimental group achieved substantially higher post-test scores (M = 68.35, SD = 7.86) compared to the control group (M = 57.24, SD = 8.33), with a mean gain difference of 10.69 points.
Table 2: ANCOVA Results for Post-test Achievement Scores
Source: Pre-test (covariate) and Group (treatment)
The ANCOVA results in Table 2 indicate a statistically significant difference in post-test achievement scores between the experimental and control groups after controlling for pre-test scores, F (1, 65) = 37.64, p < 0.001, partial η² = 0.36. In this study, the tested regression slopes are parallel, implying that the original ANCOVA results were valid as the effect size (partial η² = 0.36) is trustworthy. The large effect size (partial η² = 0.36) suggests that the difference is not only statistically significant but also practically meaningful. Therefore, the null hypothesis H₀₁ is rejected, indicating that students taught using the blended learning approach achieved significantly higher scores than those taught using traditional face-to-face methods.
Table 3 presents the descriptive statistics for post-test achievement scores by gender within the experimental group.
Table 3: Descriptive Statistics of Post-test Scores by Gender in Experimental Group
Source: Post-test scores comparison by gender.
As shown in Table 3, male students in the experimental group achieved slightly higher post-test scores (M = 69.14, SD = 7.42) compared to female students (M = 67.08, SD = 8.65), with a mean difference of 2.06 points.
Table 4 presents the results of the independent samples t-test comparing post-test achievement scores between male and female students in the experimental group.
Table 4: Independent Samples t-test Results for Gender Comparison in Experimental Group
Source: Field activity on blended learning, 2024
The t-test results in Table 4 indicate no statistically significant difference in post-test achievement scores between male and female students in the experimental group, t (32) = 0.76, p = 0.452, d = 0.26. The small effect size (d = 0.26) further supports the conclusion that gender does not substantially influence achievement in the blended learning environment. Therefore, the null hypothesis H₀₂ is not rejected, indicating that gender does not significantly influence achievement scores among students taught using blended learning approaches.
This study investigated the effects of blended learning on students' achievement in electronic laboratory workshop technology at Rivers State University, Port Harcourt. The findings revealed significantly higher achievement among students exposed to blended learning compared to those taught using traditional face-to-face methods, while no significant gender differences in achievement were observed within the blended learning environment.
The significant positive effect of blended learning on student achievement aligns with previous research findings on the effectiveness of blended approaches in higher education (Bernard et al., 2014; Means et al., 2013) and specifically in technical education contexts (Ogbuanya & Onele, 2018; Yen & Lee, 2011). The substantial effect size (partial η² = 0.36) indicates that blended learning accounted for approximately 36% of the variance in achievement scores, suggesting a practically meaningful improvement in learning outcomes.
Several factors may explain the enhanced achievement observed in the blended learning environment. First, the integration of online theoretical content with face-to-face practical sessions may have facilitated deeper understanding by allowing students to engage with theoretical concepts at their own pace before applying them in laboratory settings (Garrison & Vaughan, 2008; Horn & Staker, 2015). This aligns with constructivist learning principles, which emphasise the importance of active knowledge construction through varied experiences (Huang, 2002; Piaget, 1971).
Second, the virtual laboratory simulations incorporated in the blended approach likely provided additional opportunities for students to practise circuit design and analysis beyond the constraints of physical laboratory sessions (Makinde et al., 2020). This extended practice, coupled with immediate feedback from simulation software, may have enhanced students' procedural knowledge and analytical skills (Yen & Lee, 2011).
Third, the online collaborative activities and discussion forums in the blended approach may have facilitated peer learning and knowledge sharing, contributing to enhanced understanding of complex electronic concepts (Garrison & Kanuka, 2004). This social dimension of learning aligns with Vygotsky's (1978) sociocultural theory, which emphasises the role of social interaction in knowledge construction.
The findings suggest that blended learning offers substantial benefits for technical education, particularly in electronic laboratory workshop courses where both theoretical understanding and practical skills are essential. By effectively integrating online and face-to-face components, blended approaches can optimise instructional time, extend learning opportunities beyond traditional classroom settings, and accommodate diverse learning preferences and paces (Graham, 2006; Porter et al., 2014).
The finding of no significant gender differences in achievement among students in the blended learning environment contributes to the ongoing discourse on gender equity in technical education. While some previous studies have reported gender disparities in STEM achievement (Oluwafemi et al., 2018), others have found reduced gender gaps in technology-enhanced learning environments (Kintu et al., 2017; Ogbuanya & Onele, 2018).
The lack of significant gender differences observed in this study suggests that blended learning approaches may provide equitable opportunities for both male and female students to succeed in electronic laboratory workshop courses. This aligns with research indicating that blended learning environments can accommodate diverse learning preferences and create more inclusive educational experiences (Al-Samarraie & Saeed, 2018; Kintu et al., 2017).
Several factors may contribute to the gender equity observed in the blended learning environment. The flexibility of online components allows students to engage with content at their preferred pace and time, potentially reducing barriers that might disproportionately affect either gender (Garrison & Vaughan, 2008). Additionally, the multiple modes of instruction inherent in blended approaches might accommodate diverse learning styles, potentially benefiting both male and female students (Al-Samarraie & Saeed, 2018).
The finding suggests that blended learning approaches could contribute to promoting gender equity in technical education, particularly in fields like electronics that have traditionally shown gender imbalances (Oluwafemi et al., 2018). By providing multiple pathways to learning and achievement, blended approaches might help create more inclusive educational environments that support success for all students regardless of gender.
The positive outcomes observed in this study have significant implications for Open, Distance, and e-Learning (ODeL) practices in technical education. The successful integration of virtual laboratory simulations and online theoretical content demonstrates how ODeL institutions can overcome the traditional challenge of delivering practical technical education remotely. The blended model's effectiveness suggests that ODeL providers could adopt similar approaches, combining synchronous virtual laboratory sessions with asynchronous online content delivery to maintain the essential hands-on components of technical education while leveraging the flexibility and scalability of distance learning. This is particularly relevant for technical education institutions across Sub-Saharan Africa, where physical infrastructure limitations often constrain traditional laboratory-based instruction. The findings indicate that well-designed blended learning environments can serve as a bridge between fully online delivery and traditional face-to-face instruction, potentially enabling ODeL institutions to expand their technical education offerings while maintaining educational quality and practical skill development.
Based on the findings of this study, the following recommendations are proposed for technical education institutions across Nigeria and Sub-Saharan Africa:
This study had several limitations that should be considered when interpreting the findings and their broader applicability.
First, the quasi-experimental design, while necessary given institutional constraints, limited causal inferences. Future research could employ randomised controlled designs where feasible to strengthen causal claims and reduce threats to internal validity.
Second, the study focused on a single institution and a specific course in electrical/electronic technology education, potentially limiting generalisability to other institutions, disciplines, or cultural contexts. The findings might not be applicable to institutions with different technological infrastructure, student populations, or educational traditions. The 10-week duration of the study provided insights into short-term effects but did not address long-term learning outcomes or skill retention. Future research could investigate blended learning effects across multiple institutions and various technical education domains to enhance external validity.
Third, the study primarily measured cognitive and procedural knowledge through the achievement test, without comprehensive assessment of higher-order thinking skills, creativity, or long-term retention. The assessment instrument, while validated, might not have captured all dimensions of learning that could be influenced by blended learning approaches. Future research could employ more diverse assessment approaches, including performance-based assessments, portfolio evaluations, and longitudinal designs to examine broader and more enduring learning outcomes.
Fourth, the study did not comprehensively examine potential barriers to implementation, such as varying levels of technology access, digital literacy, or faculty readiness for blended learning delivery. These factors could significantly influence the effectiveness and feasibility of blended learning approaches, particularly in resource-constrained environments. The specific technological tools and platforms used in this study might not be available or suitable for all institutions, potentially limiting the transferability of findings.
Fifth, the study was conducted within a specific cultural and educational context (Nigeria), and the findings might not be directly applicable to other Sub-Saharan African countries or developing nations with different educational systems, technological infrastructure, or cultural attitudes toward technology-enhanced learning.
Based on these limitations, future research should address the following areas:
Such research would provide a more comprehensive understanding of how blended learning could be effectively implemented to enhance technical education outcomes across diverse contexts, particularly in developing countries facing similar educational challenges. This research agenda would contribute to building a robust evidence base for informed decision-making regarding blended learning adoption.
Al-Busaidi, K.A. (2013). An empirical investigation linking learners' adoption of blended learning to their intention of full e-learning. Behaviour & Information Technology, 32(11), 1168-1176. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2013.774047
Akçayır, G., & Akçayır, M. (2018). The flipped classroom: A review of its advantages and challenges. Computers & Education, 126, 334-345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.07.021
Al-Qahtani, A.A., & Higgins, S.E. (2013). Effects of traditional, blended and e-learning on students' achievement in higher education. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(3), 220-234. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2012.00490.x
Al-Samarraie, H., & Saeed, N. (2018). A systematic review of blended learning in higher education: The model, instructional designs, and technologies. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 30(2), 226-247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-018-9181-5
Bernard, R.M., Borokhovski, E., Schmid, R.F., Tamim, R.M., & Abrami, P.C. (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(1), 87-122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-013-9077-3
Davis, F.D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. Macmillan.
Ezenwoke, A., Ezenwoke, O., & Adeyemi-Kayode, O. (2016). Design of a laboratory inventory management system for tertiary institutions. International Journal of Computer Applications, 156(12), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.5120/ijca2016912452
Garrison, D.R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95-105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001
Garrison, D.R., & Vaughan, N.D. (2008). Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles, and guidelines. Jossey-Bass.
Garrison, D.R., & Vaughan, N.D. (2013). Institutional change and leadership associated with blended learning innovation: Two case studies. The Internet and Higher Education, 18, 24-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.09.001
Graham, C.R. (2006). Blended learning systems: Definition, current trends, and future directions. In C.J. Bonk & C.R. Graham (Eds.), Handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs (pp. 3-21). Pfeiffer Publishing.
Horn, M.B., & Staker, H. (2015). Blended: Using disruptive innovation to improve schools. Jossey-Bass.
Huang, H.M. (2002). Toward constructivism for adult learners in online learning environments. British Journal of Educational Technology, 33(1), 27-37. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8535.00236
Kintu, M.J., Zhu, C., & Kagambe, E. (2017). Blended learning effectiveness: The relationship between student characteristics, design features and outcomes. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14(1), 7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0043-4
Makinde, S.O., Makinde, O.O., & Shorunke, O.A. (2020). Learning management system adoption and performance of students in Nigerian federal polytechnics. Journal of Technical Education and Training, 12(1), 14-23. https://doi.org/10.30880/jtet.2020.12.01.002
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(3), 1-47. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811311500307
Ogbuanya, T.C., & Onele, N.O. (2018). Effectiveness of blended learning on achievement and interest of electrical/electronic education students in electrical circuits at technical colleges in Lagos State, Nigeria. Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 6(1), 75-86.
Okoye, K.R.E., Okwelle, P.C., & Okoye, P.I. (2021). Enhancing technical and vocational education and training through e-learning platform amidst COVID-19 pandemic in Nigeria. International Journal of Vocational Education and Training Research, 7(1), 25-31. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijvetr.20210701.14
Oluwafemi, I., Laseinde, T., & Gana, J.S.S. (2018). Analysis of gender-based differences in enrolment of students in science and engineering disciplines in Nigeria. Journal of Engineering, Science and Technology, 13(9), 2728-2739.
Piaget, J. (1971). Psychology and epistemology: Towards a theory of knowledge. Grossman.
Porter, W.W., Graham, C.R., Spring, K.A., & Welch, K.R. (2014). Blended learning in higher education: Institutional adoption and implementation. Computers & Education, 75, 185-195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.02.011
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F.D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186-204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Yen, J.C., & Lee, C.Y. (2011). Exploring problem solving patterns and their impact on learning achievement in a blended learning environment. Computers & Education, 56(1), 138-145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.08.012
Author Notes
Dr Offia Tugwell Owo is a Lecturer in the Department of Technical Education of Ignatius Ajuru University of Education, Port Harcourt. He received his PhD in Technical Education (Electrical/Electronics Technology) from Rivers State University, Port Harcourt in 2022 where he also taught Digital Electronics from 2017 to 2019. As part of his scholarly contributions, Dr. Owo reviews manuscripts for several publishing firms both within and outside Nigeria. He is a member of the Editorial Boards of five international journals including the Journal of Learning for Development where he actively participates in editorial services. Dr. Owo has published 36 articles in both local and international journals in addition to four chapter contributions in edited books. Additionally, Dr. Owo identifies with several professional associations including the Technology Education Practitioners Association of Nigeria, the Teachers Registration Council of Nigeria, the Association of Vocational and Technical Educators of Nigeria. He is also a registered electrical engineer with the Council for the Regulation of Engineering in Nigeria (COREN). Dr. Owo enjoys reading, writing and singing. He is happily married and already blessed with a son. Email: offia.owo@iaue.edu.ng (https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8754-3531)
Cite as: Owo, O.T. (2025). Effects of blended learning on technical education students' achievement in electronic laboratory workshop technology. Journal of Learning for Development, 12(3), 546-559.