CC BY
3УДК 37
Anafin A.N.
Astana Information Technology University (Astana, Kazakhstan)
THE IMPACT OF HYBRID AND ONLINE EDUCATION ON INSTRUCTOR-STUDENT INTERACTION IN HIGHER EDUCATION: PEDAGOGICAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES
Аннотация: article examines the effects of hybrid and online education formats on instructor-student interactions within higher education. Focusing on both pedagogical and psychological dimensions, it explores how digital learning environments, which became even more prominent during the COVID-19 pandemic, impact engagement, motivation, and learning experiences. Using a mixed-method approach, this study incorporates a student questionnaire to capture direct perspectives and secondary data from recent literature. Findings reveal that, while students appreciate the flexibility of hybrid and online formats, they also face challenges like reduced engagement, diminished sense of community, and increased mental strain. Key recommendations include enhancing instructor accessibility, fostering community through interactive techniques, and providing mental health support adapted to digital environments.
Ключевые слова: hybrid education, online learning, instructor-student interaction, pedagogy, psychology, digital engagement.
Introduction.
The transition to hybrid and online education has reshaped instructor-student interactions in higher education, especially as institutions adapted to remote learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although these formats offer benefits like flexibility and accessibility, they also present unique challenges that impact both pedagogy and student well-being. Online learning environments often require self-discipline and effective communication strategies to replace the immediacy of in-person interactions (Means et al., 2013).
This article applies Self-Determination Theory (SDT) to understand how digital learning formats affect student motivation and engagement, as SDT highlights the importance of autonomy, competence, and relatedness for maintaining intrinsic motivation (Deci & Ryan, 2014). Alongside SDT, this study also considers theories of online learning engagement (Jaggars & Bailey, 2014) and digital community-building (Garrison et al., 2000). Through secondary data and a questionnaire conducted with university students, this study addresses throbjectives: to analyze students' preferred learning formats, examine pedagogical strategies for engagement, and assess psychological impacts, including stress and motivation, in digital learning environments.
Methodology.
This research utilizes a mixed-methods approach, combining primary quantitative data with secondary sources to draw comprehensive conclusions. Primary data was collected through a structured survey distributed among bachelor's and master's students in Kazakhstan, gathering responses on their experiences and preferences in hybrid and online learning environments. This survey included multiple-choice and yes/no questions to assess preferred learning formats, engagement levels, instructor accessibility, and mental health impacts.
The study emphasizes cross-referencing these survey results with secondary data from scientific journals and doctoral dissertations, ensuring that findings are aligned with established research on digital learning. This comparative analysis allows for a deeper understanding of the pedagogical and psychological impacts of hybrid and online education on students.
Results.
Preferred Learning Format.
Survey results indicate a strong preference for hybrid learning, with 65% of students selecting it as their preferred format (sTable 1). This preference reflects students' appreciation for the flexibility of online elements combined with the structure
and engagement of occasional in-person sessions. Fully online learning was chosen by 20% of respondents, while traditional in-person classes were favored by only 15% (Figure 1).
Table 1. Preferred Learning Format.
Learning Format Percentage (%)
Hybrid 65
Fully Online 20
In-person 15
Preferred Learning Format
60
CP
S =
m
20
0 J-1-1-1-
Hyhrid Futly online In-person
Learning Format
Figure 1. Preferred Learning Format.
Instructor Accessibility in Online Courses.
When asked about instructor accessibility, 70% of students reported feeling that instructors were less accessible in online formats compared to in-person learning (sTable 2). Only 30% of respondents felt that instructors were as accessible online as they were in a traditional classroom setting. This finding suggests a need for enhanced communication practices in online courses to ensure students can access support and feedback as needed (Figure 2).
Table 2. Instructor Accessibility.
Engagement Level Percentage (%)
More accessible 30
Less accessible 70
Perception of Instructor Accessibility in Online Courses
■tes No
Response
Figure 2. Preferred Learning Format.
Engagement Levels in Online Courses.
Regarding engagement, 60% of students reported decreased engagement levels in online courses compared to traditional formats, while 25% noted no significant change (sTable 3). Interestingly, 15% indicated that their engagement increased in online settings, suggesting that some students may benefit from the flexibility and autonomy of digital learning (Figure 3).
Table 3. Engagement Levels in Online Courses.
Engagement Level Percentage (%)
Increased 15
Decreased 60
No Change 25
Figure 3. Engagement Levels in Online Courses.
Mental Health Impact of Online Learning.
The mental health impact of online learning was also highlighted, with 50% of respondents reporting a negative impact on their mental health (sTable 4). This aligns with concerns about the isolating effects of digital learning environments. Meanwhile, 40% reported no significant change, and 10% experienced a positive mental health impact, likely due to the flexibility and reduced stress from commuting (Figure 4).
Table 3. Engagement Levels in Online Courses.
Mental Health Impact Percentage (%)
Positive 10
Negative 50
No Change 40
Figure 3. Engagement Levels in Online Courses.
Discussion.
Hybrid learning was favored by 65% of respondents, reflecting students' appreciation for flexibility and structure. According to Jaggars and Bailey (2014), hybrid formats may improve learning outcomes by integrating both synchronous and asynchronous elements, which meet diverse learning needs. This preference aligns with Self-Determination Theory's emphasis on autonomy, as students can self-manage parts of their schedules while still experiencing face-to-face interactions that fulfill their need for relatedness (Deci & Ryan, 2014).
Maintaining engagement in digital formats can be challenging, as fully online settings lack spontaneous in-person interaction. Research by Boettcher and Conrad (2016) highlights that active learning strategies, such as discussion forums, group projects, and interactive Q&A sessions, are critical for sustaining engagement in digital environments. This study's findings support these recommendations, as 60% of students reported feeling disengaged in online-only courses. Active learning aligns with Constructivist Theory, which emphasizes learning through active participation (Garrison et al., 2000).
The study revealed that students in online formats often experience increased stress and isolation. Extended screen time, reduced face-to-face interaction, and lack of spontaneous communication all contribute to these feelings. Dhawan (2020) and Son et al. (2020) highlight that online learning's psychological demands may lead to mental health challenges, especially if students lack a sense of community. Self-Determination Theory's relatedness component is particularly relevant, as students need social connections to feel supported and motivated. The findings suggest that institutions should provide virtual community-building activities and mental health resources, which can help reduce isolation and screen fatigue (Hamari et al., 2014).
Conclusion.
This study underscores the complexities of hybrid and online education, revealing how these formats shape instructor-student interactions and impact student motivation and well-being. Hybrid formats were preferred, as they offer a balance of flexibility and structure. However, issues like reduced instructor accessibility, engagement challenges, and mental health concerns are prominent in online settings.
Strategies to address these issues include incorporating active learning techniques, which can make digital classes more interactive and engaging, and structured communication practices, such as virtual office hours. Furthermore, providing mental health support, such as virtual counseling and community-building activities, is essential to enhance students' psychological resilience in digital learning environments.
The findings align with key concepts in educational psychology and the Psychology of Management, offering practical insights for institutions seeking to optimize digital learning. Future research should continue to explore pedagogical strategies and technological advancements that support student engagement, mental health, and well-being.
Recommendations
To enhance hybrid and online education, institutions should invest in technology and training to ensure digital proficiency among educators and students (Dahlstrom et al., 2014). Structured communication, like timely feedback, reduces
misunderstandings and fosters support (Lowenthal et al., 2020). Providing mental health resources, including flexible deadlines and counseling, is essential to support student well-being (Son et al., 2020). Additionally, active learning methods, such as collaborative projects and discussions, help maintain engagement and mimic in-person interaction (Garrison et al., 2000).
СПИСОК ЛИТЕРАТУРЫ:
1. Boettcher, J. V., & Conrad, R.-M. (2016). The Online Teaching Survival Guide: Simple and Practical Pedagogical Tips. John Wiley & Sons;
2. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2014). Self-Determination Theory. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268;
3. Dhawan, S. (2020). Online learning: A panacea in the time of COVID-19 crisis.
Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 49(1), 5-22;
4. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105;
5. Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Sarsa, H. (2014). Does gamification work? - A literature review of empirical studies on gamification. In 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences;
6. Jaggars, S. S., & Bailey, T. (2014). Effectiveness of fully online courses for college students: Response to a Department of Education meta-analysis. Community College Research Center Working Paper, 27, 1-20;
7. Lowenthal, P. R., Borup, J., West, R. E., & Archambault, L. (2020). Using asynchronous video to maintain connection and engagement. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 28(2), 383-391;
8. 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;
9. Son, C., Hegde, S., Smith, A., Wang, X., & Sasangohar, F. (2020). Effects of COVID-19 on college students' mental health. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 22(9), e21279;
10. Dahlstrom, E., Brooks, D. C., & Bichsel, J. (2014). The current ecosystem of learning management systems in higher education. EDUCAUSE Center for Analysis and Research.
