Blended Learning Models for Secondary Education: Bridging Traditional Pedagogy and Digital Transformation
Main Article Content
Abstract
The use of digital technologies in education increasingly transforms educational practices while also revealing persistent inequities in access and participation. In elementary schools and middle schools, having unfair amounts of devices and the internet can prevent good learning. This particular study helps to show economically and socially dangerous grade disparities between white and non-white communities. Blended learning models combine traditional and contemporary pedagogical styles to enhance student learning. The research will examine if such tools increase accessibility, engagement, and learning outcomes or give rise to new issues such as digital inequality and difficulty of teaching, etc., in the secondary education sector. In this study, the researcher used data that had already been published by experts in the field. Secondary sources are used for the collection of sufficient data related to the research area. Current articles from the last five years are used to address information. They discovered that it was harder for teachers to give good quality education. In fact, schools with more developed educational programs have greater success in teaching technology. Closing the gap between people with and without technology is a long-term process. Effective interventions should include training for digital components of learning as well as tools to ensure broader access to it. Accomplishing digital equality will require all parties composing an educational system to collaborate with a goal in mind. The research offers many benefits to educators. It gives them more knowledge and helps improve learning. Addressing this challenge is crucial because it benefits education globally. The findings of the research will show the ways through which future teachers can incorporate technology for the growth of education by minimizing the negative impact on students.
Article Details

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
![]()
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
Al-Adwan, A. S., Li, N., Al-Adwan, A., Abbasi, G. A., Albelbis, N. A., & Habibi, A. (2023). “Extending the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to Predict University Students’ Intentions to Use Metaverse-Based Learning Platforms.” Education and Information Technologies, 28(1), 15381–15413. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11816-3
Ali, M., Shah, A. A., & Shah, S. A. A. (2021). Positivism and interpretivism. Qlantic Journal of Social Sciences, 2(1), 20-26.https://doi.org/10.55737/qjss.928180731
Ali, R. (2025). How challenging? Barriers for teachers in institutional implementation of blended learning. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 40(3), 324-341. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2024.2342922
Almarzuqi, A. A. A., & Mat, H. (2024). The Effectiveness of Blended Learning on STEM Achievement of Secondary School Students. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 14(1), 1645-1661. http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v14- i1/20140
Anderson, K. T., & Holloway, J. (2020). Discourse analysis as theory, method, and epistemology in studies of education policy. Journal of Education Policy, 35(2), 188-
221.https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2018.1552992
Arek-Bawa, O., & Reddy, S. (2022). Digital curricular transformation and fourth industrial revolution
4.0 (4IR): deepening divides or building bridges. EJ. Humanit. Arts Soc. Sci, 7(1), 308-326. https://doi.org/10.38159/ehass.2022sp31124
Ashraf, M. A., Yang, M., Zhang, Y., Denden, M., Tlili, A., Liu, J., ... & Burgos, D. (2021). A systematic review of systematic reviews on blended learning: Trends, gaps and future directions. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 1525-1541. https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S331741
Baas, J., Schotten, M., Plume, A., Côté, G., & Karimi, R. (2020). Scopus as a curated, high-quality bibliometric data source for academic research in quantitative science studies. Quantitative science studies, 1(1), 377-386.https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00019
Bi, B., & Ishak, N. (2025). Digital learning and social inequality in China: Assessing the barriers to access and engagement in online education. Uniglobal Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 4(1), 192-198. https://doi.org/10.53797/ujssh.v4i1.23.2025
Chen, M., Wang, Z., Liang, L., Ma, Z., & Liu, Y. (2024). Typical practical cases in blended learning. Handbook of educational reform through blended learning, 231. https://doi.org/10.1007/978- 981-99-6269-3_6
Chen, R. H. (2022). Effects of deliberate practice on blended learning sustainability: A community of inquiry perspective. Sustainability, 14(3), 1785. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031785
Efgivia, M. G., Rinanda, R. A., Hidayat, A., Maulana, I., & Budiarjo, A. (2021, October). Analysis of
constructivism learning theory. In 1st UMGESHIC International Seminar on Health, Social Science and Humanities (UMGESHIC-ISHSSH 2020) (pp. 208-212). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.211020.032
González-Betancor, S. M., López-Puig, A. J., & Cardenal, M. E. (2021). Digital inequality at home.
The school as compensatory agent. Computers & Education, 168, 104195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104195
Hakimi, L., Eynon, R., & Murphy, V. A. (2021). The ethics of using digital trace data in education: A thematic review of the research landscape. Review of educational research, 91(5), 671- 717.https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543211020116
Heponiemi, T., Gluschkoff, K., Leemann, L., Manderbacka, K., Aalto, A. M., & Hyppönen, H. (2023).
Digital inequality in Finland: access, skills and attitudes as social impact mediators. New Media & Society, 25(9), 2475-2491. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448211023007
Heponiemi, T., Gluschkoff, K., Leemann, L., Manderbacka, K., Aalto, A. M., & Hyppönen, H. (2023).
Digital inequality in Finland: access, skills and attitudes as social impact mediators. New Media & Society, 25(9), 2475-2491. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448211023007
Hill, J., & Smith, K. (2023). Visions of blended learning: identifying the challenges and opportunities in shaping institutional approaches to blended learning in higher education. Technology, pedagogy and education, 32(3), 289-303. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2023.2176916
Hrechanyk, N., Koval, D., Kovalchuk, I., Slovik, O., & Zinchenko, L. (2023). Exploring benefits and models of blended learning technology in modern professional training. Amazonia Investiga, 12(67), 54-65. https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2023.67.07.5
Iskakov, I. Z., Kovalenko, B. B., Turovskaia, M. S., & Getmanova, G. V. (2020, November). Online blended learning in the digital environment. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1691, No. 1, p. 012124). IOP Publishing. doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1691/1/012124
Joseph, O. B., Onwuzulike, O. C., & Shitu, K. (2024). Digital transformation in education: Strategies for effective implementation. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 23(2), 2785- 2799. https://doi.org/10.30574/wjarr.2024.23.2.2668
Lazar, I. M., Panisoara, G., & Panisoara, I. O. (2020). Digital technology adoption scale in the blended learning context in higher education: Development, validation and testing of a specific tool.
PloS one, 15(7), e0235957. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0235957
Li, B., Sun, J., & Oubibi, M. (2022). The acceptance behavior of blended learning in secondary vocational school students: Based on the modified UTAUT model. Sustainability, 14(23), 15897. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142315897
Li, Q., Li, Z., & Han, J. (2021). A hybrid learning pedagogy for surmounting the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic in the performing arts education. Education and Information Technologies, 26(6), 7635-7655. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10612-1
López-Fernández, I., Burgueño, R., & Gil-Espinosa, F. J. (2021). High school physical education teachers’ perceptions of blended learning one year after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. International journal of environmental research and public health, 18(21), 11146. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182111146
Makri, C., & Neely, A. (2021). Grounded theory: A guide for exploratory studies in management research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 20, 16094069211013654.https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069211013654
Mishra, N. R. (2023). Constructivist approach to learning: An analysis of pedagogical models of social constructivist learning theory. Journal of research and development, 6(01), 22-29. https://nepjol.info/index.php/jrdn/article/download/55227/41250
Mulenga, R., & Shilongo, H. (2025). Hybrid and blended learning models: Innovations, challenges, and future directions in education. Acta Pedagogia Asiana, 4(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.53623/apga.v4i1.495
Mulenga, R., & Shilongo, H. (2025). Hybrid and blended learning models: Innovations, challenges, and future directions in education. Acta Pedagogia Asiana, 4(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.53623/apga.v4i1.495
Musa, H. G., Fatmawati, I., Nuryakin, N., & Suyanto, M. (2024). Marketing research trends using technology acceptance model (TAM): a comprehensive review of researches (2002–2022). Cogent Business & Management, 11(1).
Natasia, S. R., Wiranti, Y. T., & Parastika, A. (2022). Acceptance analysis of NUADU as e-learning platform using the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) approach. Procedia Computer Science, 197, 512–520.
Olawale, B. E. (2024). Inclusive innovations: Promoting digital equity and inclusion through technological solutions. DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.1005532
Perera, P., Selvanathan, S., Bandaralage, J., & Su, J. J. (2023). The impact of digital inequality in achieving sustainable development: a systematic literature review. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, 42(6), 805-825. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/EDI-08-2022- 0224
Perera, P., Selvanathan, S., Bandaralage, J., & Su, J. J. (2023). The impact of digital inequality in achieving sustainable development: a systematic literature review. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, 42(6), 805-825. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/EDI-08-2022- 0224
Pregoner, J. D. M., & Baguio, J. B. (2024). Learning strategies and readiness towards blended learning in english subjects as predictors of students’ satisfaction during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies, 50(4), 170-184. DOI : 10.9734/AJESS/2024/v50i41321
Proudfoot, K. (2023). Inductive/deductive hybrid thematic analysis in mixed methods research.
Journal of mixed methods research, 17(3), 308-
326.https://doi.org/10.1177/15586898221126816
Ragnedda, M., Ruiu, M. L., & Addeo, F. (2022). The self-reinforcing effect of digital and social exclusion: The inequality loop. Telematics and Informatics, 72, 101852. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2022.101852
Raihan, M. M., Subroto, S., Chowdhury, N., Koch, K., Ruttan, E., & Turin, T. C. (2025). Dimensions and barriers for digital (in) equity and digital divide: A systematic integrative review. Digital Transformation and Society, 4(2), 111-127. https://doi.org/10.1108/DTS-04-2024-0054
Schöpfel, J., & Prost, H. (2021). How scientific papers mention grey literature: a scientometric study based on Scopus data. Collection and Curation, 40(3), 77-82.https://doi.org/10.1108/CC-12- 2019-0044
Singh, J., Steele, K., & Singh, L. (2021). Combining the best of online and face-to-face learning: Hybrid and blended learning approach for COVID-19, post vaccine, & post-pandemic world. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 50(2), 140-171. https://doi.org/10.1177/00472395211047865
Topping, K. J., Douglas, W., Robertson, D., & Ferguson, N. (2022). Effectiveness of online and blended learning from schools: A systematic review. Review of Education, 10(2), e3353. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3353
Topping, K. J., Douglas, W., Robertson, D., & Ferguson, N. (2022). Effectiveness of online and blended learning from schools: A systematic review. Review of Education, 10(2), e3353. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3353