INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Hybrid Learning Approaches and Their Effect on Students'  
Engagement and Academic Performance in Secondary Schools in  
Some Nigerian States  
ADEDIWURAAlaba Adeyemi., BABAYEMI Beatrice Oluwakemi., AROGUNDADE, Islamiyyah.  
Oluwakemi  
Department of Educational Foundations, Faculty of Education Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife,  
Nigeria  
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.91100013  
Received: 07 November 2025; Accepted: 14 November 2025; Published: 27 November 2025  
ABSTRACT  
This research analysed the impact of hybrid learning methods on students’ engagement and academic  
performance in secondary schools of selected states in southwestern Nigeria. A quasi-experimental method was  
utilised where 600 students from six schools, three practising the hybrid and three the traditional learning, were  
used as research subjects. The tools for the study were the Student Engagement Scale and the Academic  
Achievement Test, both of which were highly reliable (α = 0.94 and α = 0.91, respectively). The analysis used  
descriptive and inferential statistics, including independent-samples t-tests. It was found that hybrid learning  
students showed significantly higher engagement (M = 3.97, SD = 0.46) and academic achievement (M =  
34.96, SD = 5.81) than students in traditional settings (M = 3.39, SD = 0.49; M = 29.87, SD = 5.76). Mean  
differences were statistically significant (p < .001) and had large effect sizes, thus indicating that hybrid  
learning is a great enabler of both engagement and performance. Notwithstanding, challenges such as  
inconsistent electricity supply, poor internet access, and a shortage of ICT facilities were identified as major  
obstacles to the effective implementation of the hybrid method. The study shows that although hybrid learning  
has the potential to transform teaching and learning in Nigerian secondary schools, addressing infrastructure  
and teacher capacity constraints is essential for success.  
Keywords: Hybrid learning, student engagement, academic achievement, secondary schools, Nigeria  
INTRODUCTION  
The interface between education and technology has increasingly become the central stage for the  
dissemination of knowledge. Hybrid learning, which combines face-to-face teaching with online learning, has  
recently gained prominence in the post-pandemic period (Adedoyin & Soykan, 2020; Hodges et al., 2020).  
Nigeria's secondary education sector has been hindered by a lack of infrastructure, access, and quality  
assurance, underscoring the need for flexible, technology-driven pedagogies. These hybrid systems promise  
engagement and better learning outcomes; however, few empirical studies exist that bind these correlations in  
Nigerian geography. It is the engagement of students that determines the success in learning. According to  
Fredricks, Blumenfeld, and Paris (2004), engagement is behavioural, emotional, and cognitive involvement in  
learning activities. Hybrid model approaches that are effective shall foster these engagements through  
interactive, learner-centred experiences that challenge the boundaries of a traditional classroom (Dhawan,  
2020). However, it remains largely unexplored whether and how these innovative pedagogical approaches  
impact the academic performance of Nigerian secondary school students. Therefore, this work examines the  
effects of hybrid learning approaches on students' engagement and academic achievement in some Nigerian  
states, providing empirical evidence toward the realisation of a policy and practice in technology-based  
secondary education.  
The global education community has embraced hybrid learning as an alternative to the changing demands for  
more flexible and personalised education systems. According to Bernard et al. (2021), it provides space for  
differentiated instruction; apparently, it supports collaborative learning through virtual tools, allowing the  
Page 173  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
teacher to integrate several multimedia resources, both in-class and online, to mediate or enhance  
comprehension and retention (Bernard et al., 2021). In a Nigeria-type developing context, hybrid learning has  
been considered highly practical for addressing congestion in schools, the shortage of teaching materials, and  
the uneven distribution of teachers' competencies in these settings (Onyema et al., 2020; Oladipo & Adebayo,  
2023).  
Hybrid learning, or blended learning, in Graham's (2013) view, consists of the simultaneous implementation of  
traditional face-to-face training with digital or distance activities to provide flexibility and personalise  
education. According to Hrastinski (2019), learner autonomy, interactivity, and access to digital means for  
synchronous and asynchronous learning constitute elements that characterise hybrid learning environments. In  
Nigeria, Onyema et al. (2020) found that hybrid models have been introduced to address overcrowded  
classrooms, a lack of instructional resources, and teacher shortages. The adoption of hybrid models is therefore  
expected to improve students' engagement and, consequently, their academic success.  
Furthermore, the hybrid model aligns with 21st-century educational reforms focused on digital literacy, critical  
thinking, and student agency (OECD, 2020). Through the unification of physical and virtual environments,  
hybrid learning sets the stage for a highly inclusive and flexible learning ecosystem capable of catering to  
diverse learners and contexts. The implementation of hybrid learning faces challenges; these include, most  
importantly, the need for strong digital infrastructure, teachers who understand how to integrate technology  
into their teaching, and institutional policies that favour blended pedagogical practices.  
Student engagement refers to the level of attention, curiosity, interest, and active participation that learners  
show toward the learning process. Fredricks et al. (2004) argued that it includes behavioural, emotional, and  
cognitive manifestations of engagement, as students physically participate in classroom activities, as well as an  
emotional willingness to exert intellectual effort in relevant learning activities. In hybrid learning  
environments, the engagement of learners becomes a rather multidimensional and dynamic context, as learners  
navigate between face-to-face and online modalities that require self-regulation, digital competence, and active  
contribution. According to Nguyen (2022), hybrid instruction engages students through the implementation of  
technology-based learning strategies that balance synchronous and asynchronous activities. Synchronous  
sessions, such as live video class lectures, virtual group discussions, and immediate feedback, build social  
presence and immediacy for instructors and students. Conversely, asynchronous activities such as discussion  
forums, recorded lectures, and online assignments encourage cognitive engagement, as learners absorb  
information while reflecting on the learning materials in their free time (Means et al., 2014; Hrastinski, 2019).  
Empirical evidence supports the notion that well-designed hybrid environments promote motivation,  
persistence, and academic achievement. Nguyen (2022) found that hybrid students were more engaged in tasks  
and satisfied than those in traditional classes. Chen et al. (2021) also found that integrating interactive  
multimedia, gamified assessments, and collaborative tools enhanced student participation and perceived  
learning quality.  
Among the Nigerian realities, hybrid learning has begun to reshape engagement patterns in secondary and  
tertiary education. Afolabi and Adediwura (2021), along with Omodara and Adegoke (2022), noted that the  
motivation and participation levels of students tend to increase where hybrid learning has found support from  
reliable infrastructure, competent teachers, and accessible learning management systems. Nevertheless, other  
challenges such as poor internet connectivity, irregular electricity supplies, and restricted teacher capacity for  
sustained engagement can be hindering factors (Onyema et al., 2020). Thus, there must be a balance between  
pedagogical innovation, digital infrastructure, and institutional support mechanisms to enhance student  
engagement amid hybrid learning and foster interactive, inclusive learning spaces.  
Academic success simply refers to the degree to which learners obtain desired educational outcomes. Learners  
are mainly assessed on achievement scores, learning objectives achieved, and the development of higher-order  
cognitive skills such as critical thinking and problem-solving. Academic success can be represented by  
quantitative indicators, such as test scores and grades, whereas others regard it as qualitative variables,  
including student satisfaction, motivation, and self-efficacy. In the realm of hybrid learning, academic success  
Page 174  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
is measured by performance outcomes and also by learners' capacity to navigate between online and face-to-  
face modalities to construct meaningful learning (Singh et al., 2021).  
Research in different educational settings has shown that, when well-planned and implemented, hybrid or  
blended instruction does almost certainly support academic achievement. Bernard et al. (2014) explain how  
students tend to fare better in infused environments than in purely traditional ones. This is due to flexibility,  
accessibility, and the hybrid system interaction. Digital learning management systems (LMS), multimedia  
resources, and data-powered feedback mechanisms support differentiated instruction that caters to individual  
learning needs and paces (Hrastinski, 2019). Students also get to delve into digital materials, collaborate with  
peers, and receive instructor feedback-all of which engender deep learning and productive academic growth  
over time in hybrid settings. According to Singh et al. (2021), hybrid learning has been instrumental in creating  
multiple channels for knowledge acquisition through synchronous and asynchronous avenues that foster self-  
directed learning. The asynchronous setting offers opportunities for reflection and reinforces concepts, while  
real-time communication provides a sense of social presence and immediacy. Together, these two processes,  
when balanced appropriately, provide greater learning retention and comprehension. For example, Owusu-  
Fordjour, Koomson, and Hanson (2020) found that students in Ghana with hybrid learning had a significantly  
increased understanding and retention as compared to those in a typical classroom. Afolabi and Adediwura  
(2021) also documented that, in Nigerian contexts, students who received hybrid instruction in science subjects  
demonstrated enhanced cognitive engagement, analytical thinking, and problem-solving skills, especially when  
supported by interactive multimedia platforms and competent instructors.  
Despite promising developments, many contextual challenges prevent the full potential of hybrid learning from  
being realised in sub-Saharan Africa. Unfortunately, infrastructure limitations, erratic power supply, and the  
digital divide continue to create inequity in access to learning opportunities for students (Adarkwah, 2021).  
The ineffective hybrid learning method is further downplayed by inadequate teacher preparation in digital  
pedagogy and scant institutional support. Schools in Nigeria, in particular, go from not having reliable internet  
connectivity to not having ICT infrastructure, and then to the high cost of data, which does a disservice to  
students’ engagement and academic productivity (Onyema et al., 2020).  
While empirical findings have established the academic benefits of hybrid learning, few large-scale, data-  
driven studies have investigated its interventions in secondary education in Nigeria. Available literature shows  
that most studies in hybrid learning have revolved around university settings, leaving gaps to understand how  
hybrid learning relates to achievement at different cognitive levels and in different subject areas in the  
secondary school system (Omodara & Adegoke, 2022). Possible strategies to close the gaps entail conducting  
context-specific investigations and considering the state of infrastructural, pedagogical, and socio-economic  
realities in Nigerian schools. Insights from such research would guide the optimisation of hybrid learning  
toward enhanced academic achievement and sustainable educational outcomes.  
Research Questions  
1. What is the level of engagement exhibited by secondary school students in some selected Nigerian  
states exposed to hybrid learning approaches?  
2. Is there a significant difference in engagement between students exposed to hybrid learning and their  
counterparts in the traditional classroom setting?  
3. How does the hybrid method of learning affect students’ academic achievement?  
4. What are the challenges affecting the effective implementation of hybrid learning in Nigerian  
secondary schools?  
METHODOLOGY  
The research was conducted within a quasi-experimental framework using a pretest-posttest control-group  
design. This was suitable for examining the causal relationship between instructional approach and learning  
Page 175  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
outcomes. The target population for the study consisted of all Senior Secondary School (SSS) students in  
selected states of Southwestern Nigeria. This region, including states such as Osun, Oyo, and Ondo, was  
chosen due to its higher concentration of schools that have begun integrating technology-assisted instructional  
methods. The population comprises a dandling mixture of students from both public and private secondary  
schools. It thus provides an opulent environment for studying the effects of hybrid learning on engagement and  
academic achievement. The accessible population includes Senior Secondary Two (SSS II) students, as they  
were deemed suitable for the study. This study used stratified random sampling to represent all variables of  
state, school ownership, and learning approach (hybrid vs. traditional). The first stage involved selecting three  
states through simple random sampling from the six states in Southwestern Nigeria. In the second stage, two  
secondary schools were selected from each state, with one school using a hybrid learning model and the other  
adopting a traditional face-to-face approach. Within each selected school, intact classes of SSS II students were  
randomly assigned to serve as respondents for the study. There were 600 students in the study, with 300 in the  
hybrid learning group and an equal number in the traditional learning group. Based on Cochran's (1977)  
sampling size determination for large populations, the sample size was deemed adequate and had sufficient  
statistical power for inferential analysis. The distribution of gender was almost equal, with 52% males and  
48% females, thereby ensuring balanced representation of students' experiences.  
Fidelity to the hybrid protocol was monitored and documented throughout the intervention period. To ensure  
fidelity, the following procedures were followed:  
A teacher manual plus lesson plans for both hybrid and traditional conditions.  
One-week orientation for teachers before the onset of the intervention (content delivery, LMS use,  
assessment practices).  
A session log was added to the end of every lesson by teachers, which included date, session duration,  
whether the session was offline or online, and the activities planned as well as what percentage of the  
scheduled activities actually got covered. However, the average fidelity was 92% for hybrid conditions  
and 90% for traditional classes.  
Weekly observations done with checklists by project monitors (for randomly scheduled meetings) and  
verification of compliance with instructional procedures was conducted on a given measure by  
reviewing a small sample of recorded sessions (n = 18).  
Test scores were blinded; that is, the scorers were not aware of the assignment to the treatment group,  
so that they did not incorporate any rater bias into the interpretation.  
To ensure internal validity, selection bias was minimised by using stratified random sampling at the school and  
class levels; balanced groups on school type (public/private), gender mix, and socio-economic indicators where  
possible; and controlling for pretreatment in ANCOVA. The intervention and control groups were run  
concurrently over the same 6-week period; any time effects were equally applied to both groups.  
Instrumentation involved identical, validated instruments (the same AAT and SES forms) in the pretest and  
posttest for both groups. All scorers were blinded to the condition, and training was arranged to standardise  
scoring.  
To ensure ecological validity, the study needed to be conducted within the participants' original school  
environment. Prior to collecting data, permission was obtained from the educational authorities, and informed  
consent was obtained from school administrators, teachers, and students. Thus, the sampling technique would  
ensure that the selected subjects embodied the characteristics of the greater population of secondary school  
students in Southwestern Nigeria.  
For data-collecting purposes, two instruments were used: the Student Engagement Scale (SES) and the  
Academic Achievement Test (AAT). The Student Engagement Scale is a 30-item scale on a 5-point Likert scale  
measuring behavioural, emotional, and cognitive engagement, adapted from Fredricks, Blumenfeld, and Paris  
(2004). Some of the items were statements of the form, "I try hard to do well in my schoolwork." The  
Page 176  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
instrument was validated by experts in Educational Measurement and Technology and pilot-tested by 60  
students. The Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.87 for the whole scale, indicating high reliability. The  
Academic Achievement Test (AAT) comprised 50 multiple-choice items in Mathematics, Basic Science, and  
Computer Studies based on the Nigerian Secondary School Curriculum. The items were developed along the  
lines of Bloom’s classification of cognitive domains and within acceptable limits of difficulty and  
discrimination indices. Expert validation confirmed content accuracy and appropriateness. Kuder–Richardson  
internal consistency reliability (KR-20) was 0.86.  
The instructions for the experimental group were mixed-method instruction via online modules (Google  
Classroom, WhatsApp, Zoom) and face-to-face sessions in either phase of the six-week duration. However, the  
control group in traditional instruction. The pre-test and post-test scores were collected to measure changes in  
engagement and achievement. For data analysis, descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation) and  
inferential statistics (ANCOVA and t-tests) were applied, all at the 0.05 level of significance.  
Despite the said controls, the design is rather quasi-experimental (i.e., intact classes), and hence we avoid  
advocating for definitive causation; instead, we maintain a position of reporting only fairly robust evidence  
under covariate control that favours the hybrid approach, with randomised trials awaiting to provide definitive  
causal convergence evidence.  
RESULTS  
Research Question 1: What is the level of engagement exhibited by secondary school students in some selected  
Nigerian states exposed to hybrid learning approaches?  
To answer this question, the 600 students (300 hybrid, 300 traditional) had their data screened for  
completeness and then analysed using descriptive statistics and reliability analyses. Average scores were  
determined from responses to the 30-item Student Engagement scale, rated on a five-point Likert scale, to  
provide behavioural, emotional, cognitive, and overall engagement scores. The internal consistency of the  
instrument was determined by calculating Cronbach’s Alpha. Mean scores and standard deviations described  
the levels of engagement. This categorisation grouped participants into low (<2.50), moderate (2.50–3.49), or  
high (≥3.50) engagement. The results are presented in Tables 1 and 2.  
Table 1: Descriptive statistics of Secondary School Students' Engagement  
Group  
Behavioral  
3.96 ± 0.48  
3.41 ± 0.51  
3.69 ± 0.50  
Emotional  
3.97 ± 0.48  
3.40 ± 0.51  
3.69 ±0.50  
Cognitive  
3.98 ± 0.46  
3.37 ± 0.49  
3.68 ± 0.48  
Total Engagement Cronbach’s Alpha  
Hybrid  
3.97 ± 0.46  
3.39 ± 0.49  
3.68 ± 0.48  
0.94  
0.94  
0.95  
Traditional  
Overall  
Table 1 presents the mean scores, standard deviations, and reliability coefficients (Cronbach's Alpha) for  
students' engagement across behavioural, emotional, and cognitive dimensions by the type of learning offered.  
Students in the hybrid learning program demonstrated high engagement levels across all dimensions, with  
mean scores of 3.96 for behavioural engagement, 3.97 for emotional engagement, and 3.98 for cognitive  
engagement, resulting in a total engagement mean of 3.97±0.46, indicating high student engagement in hybrid  
environments. In contrast to hybrid learning, which achieved a higher level, students in the traditional learning  
setup reported lower means for each dimension, 3.41, 3.40, and 3.37, resulting in an overall mean of  
3.39±0.49, which denotes a medium level of engagement. Cronbach's Alpha, in general, ranged from 0.94 to  
0.95 in both groups, thereby surpassing the accepted value of 0.70, indicating a high degree of internal  
consistency and reliability for the engagement scale.  
Page 177  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
In general, the results support the hypothesis that hybrid learning approaches may increase student engagement  
by making participation more active, enhancing emotional connection, and augmenting cognitive involvement  
in task-oriented learning. Also, the instrument's high reliability further strengthens these results.  
Table 2: Percentage Distribution of Students’ Engagement Levels  
Group  
Low  
Moderate  
High  
Hybrid  
1.3%  
48.2%  
50.5%  
12.0%  
Traditional  
19.0% 69.0%  
Table 2 shows the percentage distribution of students' engagement levels across hybrid and traditional learning  
groups. Although it appears there might not be a generalised pattern of student engagement common to both  
techniques, the data would certainly imply a divergence. In the hybrid-learning group, 50.5% of students had  
high engagement, 48.2% had moderate engagement, and 1.3% had very low engagement. In the traditional  
learning setting, 69.0% were moderately engaged, 19.0% were low engaged, and 12.0% were high engaged.  
The pattern indicates that hybrid-type learning boosts student engagement levels among learners who exhibit  
active behaviour, emotional involvement, and cognitive engagement. The traditional setting provides support  
for students with moderate and low engagement levels, which implies less active participation and motivation  
compared to the hybrid group.  
Research Question 2: Is there a significant difference in engagement between students exposed to hybrid  
learning and their counterparts in the traditional classroom setting?  
To answer this question, a baseline engagement measure was used to ensure pre-intervention comparability  
between the hybrid and traditional groups, using the validated SES student engagement scale. This scale  
assesses behavioural, emotional, and cognitive engagement on a 5-point Likert scale. During the week before  
the instructional intervention, all participants (n = 300/group) completed this pretest engagement score.  
Descriptive statistics were used to summarise pretest engagement scores by group, with means and standard  
deviations, and an independent-samples t-test was conducted to assess whether the two groups differed at  
baseline. The results are presented in Table 3.  
Table 3: Baseline Equivalence of the Hybrid and Traditional Groups Engagement  
t
df  
P
Group  
N
SD)  
̄
Hybrid  
300  
300  
3.12  
3.10  
0.51 0.48 597  
0.52  
>.05  
Traditional  
Table 3 presents baseline engagement levels for students in hybrid and traditional groups. The average pre-  
student engagement levels for the hybrid group were 3.12 (SD = 0.51), and the traditional group recorded a  
quite similar average of 3.10 (SD = 0.52). The final error-reference tests were used to determine whether initial  
differences in the means are statistically significant. The value of t (597) = 0.48, p > .05 showed that there were  
no significant differences between groups at the baseline. This means that both groups showed similar  
behavioural, cognitive, and emotional involvement before the intervention was implemented. With an absence  
of significant differences at the baseline, the internal validity of the study was also bolstered since this absence  
strongly suggests that post-intervention variations can be better attributed to the learning intervention than to  
any disparities between the two groups that already existed. To examine whether students using hybrid learning  
materials showed higher engagement than peers who progressed through the traditional method, an analysis of  
covariance (ANCOVA) was employed, with baseline differences as a covariate. The ANCOVA evaluated the  
extent to which post-engagement scores differed between groups beyond that attributable to possible pre-  
engagement differences. The Type II ANCOVA table was produced as presented in Table 4.  
Page 178  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Table 4: ANCOVA (Type II) Showing the Effect of Hybrid Method of Learning on Students’ Engagement  
Controlling for Pretest  
Source  
SS  
df  
1
F
p
η²  
Group  
18.204  
22.731  
65.390  
165.91  
207.19  
—
< .001  
< .001  
—
0.218  
Pre-Engagement  
Residual  
1
597  
Table 4 presents the results of a Type II Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) examining the effect of the hybrid  
learning method on students’ engagement, controlling for their baseline (pretest) engagement levels. The  
analysis shows a significant main effect of instructional group, F  
= 165.91, p < .001, indicating that  
(1, 597)  
students in the hybrid learning environment demonstrated significantly higher engagement scores than those in  
the traditional classroom, after adjusting for initial engagement differences. The partial eta-squared value (η² =  
0.218) indicates that the learning approach accounted for 21.8% of the variance in post-engagement scores,  
representing a significant and educationally meaningful effect. The covariate pre-engagement also exerted a  
significant influence on post-engagement scores, F(1, 597) = 207.19, p < .001. This suggests that students with  
higher initial engagement tended to maintain higher engagement after the intervention, confirming the  
appropriateness of controlling for baseline levels. The residual variance (SS = 65.390) reflects the unexplained  
portion of engagement after accounting for pre-engagement and instructional method. Overall, the results  
indicate that hybrid learning substantially enhances students’ engagement beyond what can be predicted from  
their baseline engagement levels alone. This finding reinforces the conclusion that hybrid instructional  
strategies provide a more interactive, motivating, and cognitively stimulating learning environment compared  
to traditional classroom methods.  
Research Question 3: How does the hybrid method of learning affect students’ academic achievement?  
To answer this question, a one-way Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) was conducted to determine whether  
the instructional approach (Hybrid vs. Traditional) affected posttest measures, controlling for baseline  
differences. An independent-samples t-test was conducted to assess initial equivalence between the two groups.  
Baseline (pretest) scores were equal between the two groups at the beginning of the experiment. To account for  
sources of variability in group performance that may stem from baseline differences in their preparation levels,  
the pretest scores were thus entered into the model as a covariate.  
Table 5: Baseline Equivalence of Academic Achievement of the Hybrid and Traditional groups.  
t
df  
P
Group  
N
SD)  
̄
Hybrid  
300  
300  
30.47  
29.85  
5.36 1.42 597  
5.30  
>.05  
Traditional  
From Table 5, the average pretest values in the groups were unique (Hybrid). = 30.47, SD = 5.36; Traditional  
= 29.85. SD = 5.30), t = 1.42, p = .157, indicating no statistically significant difference at the group  
(≈597)  
mean to yield baseline data. In the event of minor baseline imbalances, we controlled for pretest differences  
analytically (ANCOVA) when isolating the effects of instructional treatment on posttest achievement  
indicators.  
Descriptive statistics-mean and standard deviation-were used to describe the post-experiment performance  
within each group. Levene’s test for the assumed equality of variances was first performed, followed by an  
independent-samples t-test to see if the mean difference between the two groups was significant.  
Page 179  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Table 6: Mean and Standard Deviation of Students’Academic Achievement  
Group  
N
SD  
̄
Hybrid  
300  
300  
34.96  
29.87  
5.81  
5.76  
Traditional  
Table 5 summarises the academic achievement scores of students in the two different learning groups,  
presenting the means and standard deviations. The mean score of students in hybrid learning was higher (  
34.96, SD = 5.81) than that of students in the traditional classroom ( = 29.87, SD = 5.76). This means that, in  
̄
=
̄
general, students taught using hybrid methods achieved better academic results than those taught only face-to-  
face. The same standard deviations indicate that the performance variability of both groups was similar.  
Therefore, the results suggest that hybrid learning has a positive effect on students' academic achievement.  
The posttest achievement scores were specified as the dependent variable, while Group (Hybrid vs.  
Traditional) acted as the fixed factor. ANCOVA was run using Type II sums of squares, which are appropriate  
for models with both categorical factors and continuous covariates and for groups of approximately equal size.  
The key statistical assumptions of ANCOVA (normality, homogeneity of variances, and homogeneity of  
regression slopes) were tested and found to be satisfied before the analysis. The results are presented in Table  
7.  
Table 7: ANCOVA (Type II) Showing the Effect of Hybrid Method of Learning on Students’ Academic  
Achievement Controlling for Pretest  
Source  
SS  
df  
1
F
p
η²  
C(Group)  
Pre (covariate)  
Residual  
3487.076  
15035.059  
14501.191  
143.56  
618.98  
—
< .001  
< .001  
—
.194  
1
597  
The ANCOVA indicated that there was a considerable difference in posttest achievement of students between  
the hybrid and traditional instructional groups after pretest scores were controlled for. Table 7 presents the  
statistical significance of the group effect, F (1, 597) = 143.56, p < .001, confirming that the instructional method  
types greatly influenced the students' performance during the post-intervention phase. The accompanying sum  
of squares (SS = 3487.076) and the partial eta-squared (η² = .194) indicate that after pretest differences were  
considered, the group variable accounted for around 19.4% of the variance in posttest scores. This is a large  
effect size, which indicates that hybrid learning has a great impact on the achievement of students. The  
covariate (Pretest) also had a statistically significant effect, F (1, 597) = 618.98, p < .001, with a very high sum of  
squares (15035.059). This tells us that the students' starting performance was a strong indicator of their final  
test scores. The strong impact of the covariate is in line with the expected relationship: those students who  
started off doing well generally continued to do well after the period of instruction.  
Research Question 4: What are the challenges affecting the effective implementation of hybrid learning in  
Nigerian secondary schools?  
To answer this question, a 10-item questionnaire was administered to all participants. The questionnaire items  
aimed to identify the main problems hindering the ratification of the hybrid learning system in Nigerian  
secondary schools. The answers to the 10-item questionnaire were evaluated on a 5-point Likert scale with 1  
(Strongly Disagree) and 5 (Strongly Agree) as the endpoints. Mean, standard deviation, and percentage  
agreement (scores of 4 or 5) were among the descriptive statistics calculated for each item to reveal the extent  
and prevalence of each challenge. The challenges were subsequently ranked by the percentage of respondents  
Page 180  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
who agreed or strongly agreed, providing a transparent indication of the most significant obstacles to effective  
hybrid learning implementation.  
Table 8: Challenges Affecting the Effective Implementation of Hybrid Learning in Nigerian Secondary  
Schools  
S/N  
1
Challenges  
SD  
% Agree (4 or 5) Rank  
̄
Unstable electricity/power supply  
Poor internet connectivity  
4.02  
3.91  
3.82  
3.74  
3.63  
3.51  
3.38  
3.27  
3.14  
3.02  
0.89  
1.00  
1.02  
0.93  
1.08  
1.06  
0.98  
1.01  
1.02  
1.10  
82.7  
80.5  
77.2  
75.0  
72.1  
68.4  
63.2  
61.7  
58.6  
56.0  
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10  
2
3
Inadequate school ICT infrastructure  
Limited teacher capacity/training in digital pedagogy  
Lack of personal devices (phones/laptops/tablets)  
High cost of data/ICT resources  
4
5
6
7
Low student digital literacy  
8
Poorly aligned curriculum for hybrid delivery  
Assessment and examination challenges  
Lack of parental support/supervision  
9
10  
Table 8 presents the mean ratings, standard deviations, and percentage agreements for ten identified challenges  
to hybrid learning implementation. First, the results show that “unstable electricity supply ( = 4.02, SD =  
0.89; 82.7%)” came first and was the most vital barrier to hybrid learning, meaning that often the power cuts  
bled the online and combined learning activities till nothing was left. Then “poor internet connectivity (  
3.91; 80.5%)” and “inadequate school ICT infrastructure ( = 3.82; 77.2%)” appeared, which, in fact, were  
infrastructural shortcomings hindering the successful hybrid learning as the top factors. Likewise, “limited  
teacher capacity in digital pedagogy ( = 3.74; 75.0%)” and “lack of personal devices ( = 3.63; 72.1%)” were,  
̄
̄
=
̄
̄
̄
apart from infrastructure, the most important challenges pointing at the unpreparedness of the teacher and the  
student for technology-led teaching and learning. Moderate-level challenges that came after were “high cost of  
data (  
3.27; 61.7%)”. The challenges that received the least rating were “assessment and examination issues (  
3.14; 58.6%)” and “lack of parental support (  
̄
= 3.51; 68.4%)”, “low student digital literacy (  
̄
= 3.38; 63.2%)”, and “poor curriculum alignment (  
̄
=
=
̄
̄
= 3.02; 56.0%)”, however, these still unavoidably point to  
serious problems. Thus, the results suggest that the “infrastructural degradation, limited digital capacity, and  
economic barriers” are the main hurdles to the effective implementation of hybrid learning in Nigeria’s  
secondary schools. These three areas must be addressed for hybrid educational models to be sustained and  
succeed.  
Table 9: Summary of Major Challenge Dimensions Affecting the Effective Implementation of Hybrid Learning  
in Nigerian Secondary Schools  
Challenge Category  
Infrastructure-related  
Teacher-related  
Examples of Issues Reported  
Severity (Mean) Interpretation  
Power supply, ICT facilities, and internet  
Training in digital pedagogy skills  
3.9  
3.7  
Very severe  
Severe  
Page 181  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Devices, digital literacy, parental support  
Misalignment, evaluation difficulties  
and  
3.4  
3.2  
Moderately severe  
Moderate  
Student-related  
Curriculum  
assessment  
The impact of infrastructure-related challenges (Mean = 3.9, rated as very severe) is demonstrated in Table 9,  
where the most unstable electricity, poor internet connectivity, and inadequate ICT facilities were identified as  
the most critical problems to be addressed to achieve effective hybrid learning. On the other hand, teacher-  
related issues (Mean = 3.7) received a severe rating, indicating that teachers, due to insufficient training and  
limited digital pedagogical skills, are responsible for the ineffective delivery of hybrid lessons. Participant  
issues (Mean = 3.4) were presumed as moderately severe, meaning that lack of personal devices, low digital  
literacy, and even less parental support, among others, are only moderately affecting students' participation and  
engagement in hybrid learning. Moreover, curriculum and assessment difficulties (Mean = 3.2) were judged as  
moderate; thus, it was concluded that, while there are issues such as curriculum misalignment and assessment  
difficulties, they cannot be prioritised over infrastructural and teacher-related problems. Having considered the  
above, it can be concluded that the main challenges to hybrid learning in Nigerian secondary schools are  
infrastructure and teacher preparedness.  
DISCUSSION  
In the present research, it was demonstrated that hybrid learning secondary school students showed, on  
average, about 0.4 points higher engagement than students in traditional classrooms (M ≈ 3.97 vs. M ≈ 3.39).  
So, it was concluded that the hybrid models can affect the engagement of all types, i.e., behaviour, emotion,  
and cognition positively, and this is in line with Perfectson et al. (2024). This previous study has alluded to the  
idea that blended learning frameworks encourage student participation, independence, and interaction more  
than in-person instruction. The result emphasises the ability of hybrid teaching to convert the classrooms into  
more vibrant, learner-centred ones that engage learners at higher levels. Apart from higher engagement,  
students in the hybrid group also performed academically better (M ≈ 34.96) than their counterparts in the  
traditional group (M ≈ 29.87), suggesting a strong positive effect of the hybrid method on academic  
achievement. In fact, recent empirical literature from Nigeria has also reported similar cases of influence on  
achievement due to the use of blended or hybrid methods. For instance, Audu (2024) concluded that learning  
through the hybrid method led to significant gains in geography literacy among secondary-school students in  
North-Eastern Nigeria. Therefore, the current study confirms again that hybrid learning is not only an effective  
engagement strategy but also an academic outcomes improver.  
The categorical engagement level distribution revealed that, in addition to mean scores, a little more than half  
(50.5%) of the students in the hybrid group were categorised as "highly engaged", compared with just 12.0%  
of the students in the traditional group. On the other hand, almost 19.0% of the traditional students were  
classified as "low engagement" in comparison to only 1.3% in the hybrid group. This indicates that the hybrid  
method provides an average engagement increase, but the distribution is shifted upward with a steep cut-off,  
where low-engagement cases are all but eliminated, while high-engagement cases show a very noticeable  
increase. The change aligns with the view that a hybrid environment consistently provides the conditions for  
students’ motivation to be sustained and their involvement to be deeper (Godfrey Perfectson et al., 2024).  
Despite the evident advantages of hybrid learning, the investigation also points out significant difficulties.  
Infrastructure-related problems (mean severity ≈3.9), such as unreliable power supply, lack of ICT resources,  
and lack of internet connectivity, topped the list of most serious obstacles. Challenges related to teachers (mean  
≈3.7) included limited training and a lack of skills in digital pedagogy, and were ranked just after  
infrastructure-related issues. Challenges pertaining to students (mean ≈3.4) and curriculum/assessment  
problems (mean ≈3.2) were rated mild to moderate severity. These results are consistent with the latest  
research: for example, Sele et al. (2023) identified infrastructural deficits and digital readiness gaps as primary  
hindrances in the context of Nigerian blended learning. Hence, though hybrid learning has great potential, its  
impact is still limited by not only resource availability but also by the system's capacity issues.  
Page 182  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Implications  
The strong positive outcomes, on the one hand, and the contextual barriers, on the other, imply a dual strategy  
for policymakers and practitioners. First, the data support introducing hybrid models in secondary schools to  
increase both engagement and achievement. Second, an introduction should be made together with investments  
in infrastructure (power, internet, and devices) and teacher training. Failure to do so may lead to uneven  
implementation and, as a result, the full benefits of the hybrid model may not be realised.  
REFERENCES  
1. Adarkwah, M. A. (2021). “I’m not against online teaching, but what about us?”: ICT in Ghana post  
COVID-19. Education and Information Technologies, 26(2), 1665–1685.  
2. Adedoyin, O. B., & Soykan, E. (2020). COVID-19 pandemic and online learning: The challenges and  
opportunities. Interactive Learning Environments, 29(5), 1–13.  
3. Afolabi, O. E., & Adediwura, A. A. (2021). Influence of blended learning strategies on students’  
engagement in science education. Nigerian Journal of Educational Technology, 5(2), 101–114.  
4. Audu, H. D.-A. (2024). The effectiveness of hybrid learning-based program on the academic  
achievement of second year secondary school stage students in geography and their self-learning in  
North-Eastern Nigeria. MJETEC, 127(4), 131-147. https://doi.org/10.21608/maed.2024.409533  
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  
6. Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Schmid, R. F., & Tamim, R. M. (2021). Blended learning  
effectiveness: A meta-analysis of empirical research. Educational Research Review, 33(4), 100391.  
7. Chen, S., Wang, H., & Lee, J. (2021). Enhancing student engagement in blended learning through  
interactive media and collaborative tools. Computers  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104353  
&
Education, 176, 104353.  
8. Dhawan, S. (2020). Online learning: A panacea in the time of COVID-19 crisis. Journal of Educational  
Technology Systems, 49(1), 5–22.  
9. Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept,  
state  
of  
the  
evidence.  
Review  
of  
Educational  
Research,  
74(1),  
59–109.  
https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059  
10. Godfrey Perfectson, O., Otega Prosper, E., & Onwuzo, C. J. (2024). Evaluating the impact of blended  
learning models on higher education outcomes: A multidimensional analysis. Journal of Digital  
Learning and Distance Education, 4(2), xx-xx. https://doi.org/10.56778/jdlde.v4i2.535  
11. Graham, C. R. (2013). Emerging practice and research in blended learning. In M. G. Moore (Ed.),  
Handbook of distance education (3rd ed., pp. 333–350). Routledge.  
12. Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020). The difference between emergency  
remote teaching and online learning. Educause Review, 27(1), 1–12.  
13. Hrastinski, S. (2019). What do we mean by blended learning? TechTrends, 63(5), 564–569.  
14. Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., & Bakia, M. (2014). The effectiveness of online and blended  
learning: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. U.S. Department of Education.  
15. Nguyen, T. (2022). Student engagement in hybrid learning environments: A systematic review.  
Education and Information Technologies, 27(7), 9045–9068. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-  
11165-3  
16. OECD. (2020). The future of education and skills: Education 2030. OECD Publishing.  
17. Oladipo, T. A., & Adebayo, K. M. (2023). Digital integration and blended learning practices in  
Nigerian secondary education: Opportunities and challenges. African Journal of Educational  
Technology, 9(2), 45–59.  
18. Omodara, O. D., & Adegoke, B. A. (2022). Digital pedagogy and student engagement in Nigerian  
hybrid classrooms. International Journal of Innovative Education Research, 10(1), 12–24.  
19. Onyema, E. M., Eucheria, N. C., Obafemi, F. A., & Sen, S. (2020). Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on  
education and its implications for e-learning in Nigeria. International Journal of Innovation and  
Research in Educational Sciences, 7(2), 125–136.  
Page 183  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
20. Owusu-Fordjour, C., Koomson, C. K., & Hanson, D. (2020). The impact of Covid-19 on learning: The  
perspective of the Ghanaian student. European Journal of Education Studies, 7(3), 88–101.  
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3753586  
21. Sele, J. P., Nyakerario, F., & Wanjiku, C. (2023). Blended learning: Threats and hurdles in developing  
countries: A case study of Nigeria and Kenya. Greener Journal of Social Sciences, 13(1), 151-158.  
https://doi.org/10.15580/gjss.2023.1.112024176  
22. 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, and post-pandemic world. Journal  
of Educational Technology Systems, 50(2), 140–171. https://doi.org/10.1177/00472395211047865  
Page 184  
www.rsisinternational.org