INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Students’ Perceived Impacts of Blended Learning on Writing  
Development  
Ayuni Madarina Abdul Rahman*  
The Academy of Language Studies, UITM Cawangan Terengganu, Kampus Kuala Terengganu,  
Malaysia  
*Corresponding Author  
DOI: https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.91100XXX  
Received: XX November 2025; Accepted: XX December 2025; Published: XX December 2025  
ABSTRACT  
Teaching and learning writing involves developing students’ linguistic and communicative competence;  
however, educators continue to face challenges in identifying approaches that effectively support writing  
development. While various instructional models such as teacher-centred teaching, online learning, and blended  
learning have been explored, the specific impacts of blended learning on students’ writing performance remain  
insufficiently studied. This research therefore examines students’ perceptions of learning writing through a  
blended learning approach, focusing on four key areas: collaborative exchange, self-efficacy, online discussion,  
and face-to-face interaction. A qualitative research design was employed to collect, analyse, and interpret data.  
Through purposive sampling, six students who had experienced writing instruction in a blended learning  
environment were selected. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to gain insight into their experiences.  
Findings show that students perceived blended learning as enhancing collaborative exchange, allowing them to  
share ideas, seek clarification, and support one another more effectively. They also reported improved self-  
efficacy, as blended activities and regular feedback increased their confidence in expressing ideas and  
completing writing tasks. In addition, students valued online discussion platforms, which offered greater  
flexibility, accessibility, and comfort when engaging with writing-related content. At the same time, they  
emphasised the importance of face-to-face interaction, particularly for receiving clearer explanations, observing  
non-verbal cues, and strengthening lecturer–student rapport. Overall, the results suggest that blended learning  
provides a flexible, supportive, and conducive environment that positively influences students’ writing  
development. The study offers insights that may guide educators in refining blended learning practices for more  
effective writing instruction.  
Keywords— Blended Learning Approach, ESL Writing, Student Perceptions, Writing Development, Online  
Learning  
INTRODUCTION  
Writing remains one of the most challenging skills for ESL learners because it requires organisation, clarity,  
linguistic accuracy, and the ability to express ideas logically. Recent research continues to show that many  
learners struggle with grammar, coherence, vocabulary, and paragraph development despite years of English  
instruction (Wang & He, 2022). These persistent difficulties highlight the need for more supportive teaching  
approaches that can enhance student engagement and scaffold the writing process.  
Blended learning has become a widely adopted method in higher education over the past few years, combining  
face-to-face instruction with online tools to create a more flexible and interactive learning environment. Studies  
in recent years reveal that blended learning improves writing performance, reduces anxiety, and increases  
students’ engagement with writing tasks (Alshammari, 2023; Hidayati & Sugeng, 2023). Its multimodal nature  
allows students to receive continuous feedback, collaborate with peers, and access resources at their own pace.  
Because students’ perceptions strongly influence their motivation and participation, understanding how they  
experience blended learning is essential. Therefore, this study aims to examine students’ perceptions of blended  
Page 4053  
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  
learning and its influence on their writing development, offering updated insights into contemporary ESL writing  
practices.  
LITERATURE REVIEW  
Blended Learning  
Blended learning has become increasingly prominent in higher education, especially in language classrooms,  
due to its ability to combine face-to-face instruction with digital learning tools. Recent studies show that students  
generally respond positively to this approach because it offers flexibility, immediate access to resources, and  
opportunities for continuous engagement beyond the classroom (Wang & He, 2022).  
In writing courses specifically, blended learning has been found to enhance learners’ performance and reduce  
writing anxiety by allowing them to practise at their own pace and revisit materials as needed (Alshammari,  
2023). Students benefit from the integration of technology, which supports drafting, editing, and receiving  
feedback more efficiently. Research also highlights that blended learning encourages active participation since  
learners can engage with videos, online tasks, and collaborative platforms that support different learning  
preferences (Hidayati & Sugeng, 2023).  
Recent work also emphasises the importance of designing meaningful blended activities. When online  
components are interactive and well-structured, students demonstrate higher engagement and deeper  
understanding of writing concepts. Collaborative digital tools, discussion forums, and real-time communication  
platforms help create an environment where students can explore, question, and share ideas, making the learning  
experience more dynamic and supportive.  
Students’ perception  
Students’ perceptions play a crucial role in determining the effectiveness of blended learning, particularly in  
writing classes. Recent studies indicate that learners perceive blended learning as more engaging, less  
intimidating, and more helpful in allowing them to express ideas at their own pace (Ibrahim & Hassan, 2023).  
Positive perceptions often stem from the accessibility of materials, the ability to revisit lecturer feedback, and  
the comfort of interacting through online spaces.  
One key factor influencing students’ perceptions is the sense of increased self-efficacy. When learners receive  
timely feedback, participate in collaborative tasks, and experience small writing successes through blended  
platforms, their belief in their own ability improves (Huang & Boney, 2022). This improvement in confidence  
contributes to better performance and more consistent participation in writing activities.  
Students also value collaborative opportunities within blended learning. Digital communication tools allow them  
to discuss content, exchange ideas, and provide peer feedback—elements that have been shown to strengthen  
writing development (Zou & Xie, 2022). Many learners appreciate the balance between online and face-to-face  
communication, as the blended environment provides both convenience and the clarity that comes from in-person  
explanations.  
Overall, recent literature consistently highlights that students perceive blended learning as beneficial when the  
online and face-to-face components complement each other. Clear instructions, interactive tasks, and supportive  
digital platforms contribute to a positive learning experience and enhance students’ writing development.  
While existing studies consistently highlight positive learner attitudes toward blended learning, several gaps  
remain in the context of ESL writing. Much of the current literature focuses on evaluating writing performance  
outcomes (e.g., Alshammari, 2023; Hidayati & Sugeng, 2023), yet fewer studies explore how learners perceive  
the interaction between online tools, peer collaboration, and instructor presence in shaping their writing  
development.  
Moreover, prior studies rarely address how learners’ technological readiness, confidence levels, and \  
Page 4054  
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  
communication preferences influence their experience in blended writing environments (Ibrahim & Hassan,  
2023). Although some research has examined self-efficacy (Huang & Boney, 2022) and collaborative learning  
(Zou & Xie, 2022), limited attention has been given to the combined impact of these factors within the same  
instructional setting.  
Another gap involves the lack of studies exploring learner perceptions using small, in-depth qualitative samples,  
which are better suited to understanding nuanced writing behaviours. Hence, this study contributes by examining  
learner experiences holistically—across collaboration, self-efficacy, online interaction, and face-to-face  
engagement—within a single blended writing course.  
METHODOLOGY  
This study employed a qualitative research design to explore students’ perceptions of learning academic writing  
through a blended learning approach. Qualitative inquiry is suitable for studies that seek to understand  
participants’ lived experiences, beliefs, and personal interpretations in real educational settings (Creswell & Poth,  
2023). This approach allowed the researcher to capture nuanced descriptions of how learners interacted with  
both online and face-to-face components throughout the course.  
Case Study Design  
A case study approach was adopted because the focus of the research was on examining a real and ongoing  
instructional situation in learning academic writing through blended learning. Case studies are widely used in  
education research when the goal is to explore a particular phenomenon in depth and understand the contextual  
factors surrounding it (Yazan, 2022). In this study, the case refers to a group of ESL learners enrolled in a writing  
course that incorporated blended learning as its primary instructional design.  
This design was appropriate as it enabled a holistic investigation of how students navigated digital tools,  
interacted with peers and lecturers, and responded to the writing tasks assigned. An intrinsic case study was  
selected because the intention was not to generalise findings, but to understand the case itself in a rich and  
detailed manner. Intrinsic case studies are typically chosen when the researcher has a genuine interest in a  
particular context and seeks to gain deep insight into its internal processes (Hyett, Kenny, & Dickson-Swift,  
2022).  
Sampling Strategy  
Purposive sampling was used to select participants who had direct experience with blended learning in an  
academic writing course. This sampling method is appropriate when researchers need information-rich  
participants who can provide detailed and relevant insights into the phenomenon being studied (Palinkas et al.,  
2023).  
A total of six students were selected because they met the inclusion criteria:  
1. They were enrolled in the writing course using blended learning.  
2. They had completed both online and face-to-face components.  
3. They were willing to participate in an in-depth interview.  
Participant Demographics  
Six ESL undergraduates (aged 19–21) enrolled in an Academic Writing course participated in the study. All  
were Malaysian learners with intermediate English proficiency based on institutional placement assessments.  
While all participants had basic exposure to online learning during the COVID-19 period, their technological  
experience differed, ranging from frequent digital tool usage to minimal familiarity with online writing  
platforms.  
A small sample size is considered suitable for qualitative case studies because it allows the researcher to focus  
Page 4055  
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  
closely on each participant’s experiences and produce meaningful, in-depth interpretations rather than broad  
generalisations (Guest, Namey, & Chen, 2022).  
Context and Course Structure  
The writing course was delivered using a blended format consisting of weekly face-to-face lectures and online  
learning tasks via interactive learning platforms. Additional tools used included WhatsApp for group  
coordination, Google Docs for collaborative drafting, Facebook groups for threaded discussions, Quizizz for  
formative assessment activities, Canva Whiteboard for collaborative brainstorming, Google Sites for hosting  
learning materials and student portfolios, and Padlet for idea sharing and asynchronous discussion.  
Course assignments included paragraph writing tasks, peer-review activities, and a final essay project. Students  
alternated between online drafting and in-class consultations, allowing digital work to be reinforced through  
immediate, face-to-face feedback.  
Data Collection: Semi-Structured Interviews  
Semi-structured interviews were used as the main data collection instrument. This method provides flexibility  
for participants to express their thoughts freely while still allowing the researcher to explore specific areas  
relevant to the study (Jamshed, 2023). Interviews were conducted individually, allowing participants to speak  
openly about their experiences with blended learning, particularly regarding interaction, confidence, and writing  
development.  
The interview protocol was developed based on guidelines for qualitative interviewing, ensuring that questions  
were open-ended, neutral, and aligned with the research objectives. Semi-structured interviews are appropriate  
for educational research because they allow researchers to probe deeper into participants’ explanations and obtain  
rich, detailed responses (Queen & Klenke-Boush, 2024).  
All interviews were audio-recorded with participants’ consent and later transcribed for analysis.  
Data Analysis  
The transcribed interviews were analysed using thematic analysis. This method is commonly used in qualitative  
studies to identify patterns, categories, and themes across the dataset (Braun & Clarke, 2023). The researcher  
followed the standard six-step procedure: familiarisation with data, generating initial codes, searching for  
themes, reviewing themes, defining themes, and producing the final report.  
Themes were developed inductively, allowing the findings to emerge naturally from students’ narratives rather  
than being imposed by existing theories. This approach provided a genuine representation of participants’  
perceptions and experiences.  
Trustworthiness and Validity  
To ensure the quality and credibility of the study, several trustworthiness strategies were implemented, guided  
by contemporary qualitative research standards (Nowell et al., 2023):  
Credibility  
Member checking was conducted by sharing summarised findings with participants to confirm accuracy and  
ensure that interpretations reflected their actual views.  
Transferability  
Thick descriptions of the research context, participants, and blended learning environment were provided so  
readers can determine the applicability of the findings to similar settings.  
Page 4056  
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  
Dependability  
A clear and transparent audit trail was maintained, documenting decisions made throughout data collection and  
analysis. This improves the study’s procedural reliability.  
Confirmability  
Researcher reflexivity was practised to minimise bias. Field notes and reflective memos were kept to ensure that  
findings were grounded in participant data rather than the researcher’s assumptions.  
FINDINGS  
The findings of this study revealed four major themes that describe students’ experiences with blended learning  
in their academic writing course: (1) Collaborative Exchange, (2) Self-Efficacy, (3) Online Discussion, and  
(4) Face-to-Face Interaction. Each theme reflects how students perceived blended learning as influencing their  
communication, confidence, and writing development.  
Table 1. Summary of Themes Across Participants  
Themes  
S1  
S2  
S3  
S4  
S5  
S6  
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
Collaborative Exchange  
Self-Efficacy  
/
/
/
/
Online discussion  
Face-to-Face interaction  
/
/
Collaborative Exchange  
Students consistently highlighted that blended learning increased opportunities for collaborative exchange with  
peers and lecturers. They valued the balance between online platforms and classroom activities, which made it  
easier to work together, exchange ideas, and clarify content. This aligns with recent studies showing that blended  
learning environments promote stronger peer collaboration through shared digital platforms and structured group  
tasks (Zou & Xie, 2022).  
Student Quotation  
S3  
S1  
“Blended learning approach really enhances my interaction with my lecturer and friends.”  
“We had a lot of fun working together, sharing our information, and supporting each other.”  
Students felt the blended approach made group work more manageable because they could discuss online and  
later refine their ideas during face-to-face meetings. These interactions helped them strengthen their writing  
performance by receiving feedback from multiple sources.  
Self-efficacy  
Another important theme was the development of self-efficacy. Many students reported that blended learning  
made them more confident in expressing ideas and completing writing tasks. This growth in confidence often  
stemmed from repeated practice, clear feedback, and opportunities to participate in both online and classroom  
activities. Recent research supports this, noting that blended learning enhances learners’ writing self-efficacy  
through continuous digital and face-to-face feedback cycles (Huang & Boney, 2022).  
Page 4057  
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  
Student Quotation  
“I had the opportunity to express my opinions and present with greater confidence.”  
“It increases my confidence when I’m able to share my opinions and ideas without restrictions.”  
“Yes, blended learning allows me to share my knowledge with others.”  
S3  
S4  
S5  
These comments indicate that blended learning enabled students to see their own progress, which strengthened  
their sense of ability in writing and communication. The mixed learning environment gave them more space to  
practise without feeling judged or rushed, which helped build their overall confidence.  
Online Discussion  
The third theme focuses on online discussion, which students viewed as an accessible and less intimidating  
space for communication. Participants explained that interacting online—through WhatsApp, Facebook, or  
learning platforms—helped them retrieve information quickly, ask questions freely, and understand lessons  
better. This supports recent findings that online components in blended learning promote learner engagement by  
offering comfortable, student-friendly communication channels (Rahimi & Fathi, 2023).  
Student  
S1  
Quotation  
“I prefer online communication because it provides access to more information.”  
“It helps me understand things more easily.”  
S2  
“Online communication requires a strong internet connection to be effective.”  
S6  
Despite technical challenges, students still saw online discussion as beneficial because it provided continuous  
access to support and explanations. These findings mirror current literature that emphasises online tools as key  
contributors to collaboration and idea generation in blended writing environments (Miftah, 2024).  
Face-to-face interaction  
Although students appreciated the flexibility and comfort of online communication, they still valued face-to-  
face interaction as an essential part of their writing course. Participants felt that in-person lessons helped them  
understand explanations more clearly, observe non-verbal cues, and receive immediate responses to questions.  
These perceptions reflect recent research showing that face-to-face interaction remains vital in blended learning  
because it provides clarity, emotional support, and lecturer presence (Lim & Wang, 2022).  
Student Quotation  
“If we are unsure about something, we can ask the lecturer directly.”  
S3  
S5  
S6  
“Being able to make eye contact helps me understand the lesson more clearly.”  
“Face-to-face communication allows me to interpret body language, emotions, tone, and reactions  
more clearly.”  
Overall, students believed that face-to-face sessions complemented online learning by reinforcing understanding  
and fostering stronger lecturer–student connections. This balance made the writing course more engaging,  
structured, and supportive.  
Page 4058  
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  
While perceptions were largely positive, several participants expressed concerns about aspects of blended  
learning. Two participants noted that online platforms sometimes created communication delays, especially  
when peers were unresponsive. Others mentioned difficulty managing multiple digital tools simultaneously,  
which occasionally led to confusion about task instructions.  
One student shared that excessive reliance on online discussion made them feel “disconnected” from classmates,  
suggesting that blended learning may reduce social presence when not balanced appropriately. These  
unfavourable perceptions highlight the need for clearer scaffolding and stronger instructor monitoring in online  
components.  
DISCUSSION  
The findings reinforce existing scholarship suggesting that blended learning enhances writing development  
through interaction, flexibility, and multimodal communication. However, this study extends previous work by  
showing how these elements interact from the learner perspective.  
The analysis reveals that collaborative exchange is strengthened not only by online platforms but by the interplay  
between asynchronous communication and in-person refinement. This hybrid pattern supports deeper processing  
of feedback—an insight that previous performance-oriented studies have not emphasised.  
The study also adds nuance to discussions of writing self-efficacy. While confidence increased through repeated  
practice, students’ self-belief was closely tied to the availability of multimodal feedback rather than the mode of  
instruction alone.  
Furthermore, although online platforms facilitated comfort and flexibility, students’ mixed perceptions suggest  
that digital communication may also create barriers when social presence is low or when technology is unstable.  
This highlights a need to balance convenience with human connection—a tension underexplored in past research.  
By integrating these dimensions, the study helps address the literature gap concerning how learners experience  
blended writing instruction beyond performance metrics.  
LIMITATIONS  
This study has several limitations. First, the small sample size limits transferability, although it aligns with  
qualitative inquiry. Participant demographics, such as varying levels of technological proficiency, may have  
influenced their perceptions. Second, data were drawn from a single writing course in one institution, which may  
affect contextual generalisability. Third, the study relied solely on self-reported perceptions; observational or  
performance-based data could strengthen future analyses.  
FUTURE RESEARCH RECOMMENDATION  
Future studies may investigate blended learning in writing courses using larger or more diverse samples, or  
compare learners across fully online, hybrid, and traditional modes. Longitudinal studies could explore how  
sustained blended exposure influences writing performance and confidence over multiple semesters.  
Additionally, further research could examine specific digital tools—such as AI-assisted feedback systems,  
collaborative platforms, or multimodal writing environments—to identify which tools yield the strongest support  
for writing development.  
CONCLUSION  
This study examined students’ perceptions of learning academic writing through a blended learning approach,  
focusing on collaborative exchange, self-efficacy, online discussion, and face-to-face interaction. Overall, the  
findings show that students responded positively to blended learning and believed that the combination of digital  
tools and classroom teaching supported their writing development in meaningful ways.  
Page 4059  
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  
Students highlighted that blended learning strengthened interaction with peers and lecturers, creating more  
opportunities for collaborative exchange during writing activities. They also reported increased self-efficacy, as  
the blended environment allowed them to express ideas more comfortably, participate actively, and recognise  
their own strengths. Online discussion platforms offered flexibility and constant access to information, helping  
students clarify doubts and stay engaged in the writing process. At the same time, face-to-face sessions provided  
essential guidance, personal support, and clearer explanations—elements that students felt were necessary for  
understanding writing tasks in depth.  
The findings align with recent research indicating that blended learning is most effective when online and face-  
to-face components complement each other. When designed purposefully, blended learning can enhance  
interaction, build learner confidence, and create a more supportive and engaging writing environment. This study  
contributes to ongoing discussions about the role of blended learning in ESL writing instruction and highlights  
the need for educators to adopt approaches that integrate technology meaningfully rather than superficially.  
Moving forward, educators and institutions may consider providing structured online resources, clear feedback  
mechanisms, and opportunities for collaborative learning to maximise the benefits of blended learning for writing  
development. Future research could explore how different digital tools influence writing outcomes or compare  
blended learning with other technology-enhanced models to gain deeper insights into effective writing pedagogy.  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT  
The author extends heartfelt thanks to the students who took part in this study and generously shared their  
perspectives on blended learning. Appreciation is also conveyed to the lecturers and university staff who  
provided continuous support during the research process. Their encouragement and cooperation greatly  
contributed to the completion of this work.  
REFERENCES  
1. Alshammari, R. (2023). The impact of blended learning on EFL students’ writing performance and writing  
anxiety. Education and Information Technologies, 28(2), 1451–1470. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-  
022-11253-4  
2. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2023). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. SAGE Publications.  
3. Cheng, H.-F., & Lai, C. (2023). Peer collaboration in blended writing tasks: Insights from learners’  
perspectives. System, 112, 102993.  
4. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2023). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five  
approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.  
5. Guest, G., Namey, E., & Chen, M. (2022). A simple method to assess sample sufficiency in qualitative  
research. Field Methods, 34(3), 240–250.  
6. Hidayati, K. H., & Sugeng, B. (2023). Blended learning to enhance EFL students’ academic writing:  
Students’ engagement and challenges. Journal of Language and Education, 9(1), 102–115.  
7. Huang, Y.-M., & Boney, M. (2022). Improving EFL learners’ writing self-efficacy through blended  
feedback. Interactive Learning Environments, 30(6), 1123–1138.  
8. Hyett, N., Kenny, A., & Dickson-Swift, V. (2022). Intrinsic case study methodology in qualitative  
research. Qualitative Research Journal, 22(4), 450–462.  
9. Ibrahim, N., & Hassan, R. (2023). Students’ perceptions of blended learning environments: Clarity,  
support, and interaction. Education and Information Technologies, 28(5), 6781–6801.  
10. Jamshed, S. (2023). Qualitative research and qualitative interviews: An updated review. Journal of  
Education and Health Promotion, 12(1).  
11. Lim, C., & Wang, T. (2022). Balancing online and face-to-face instruction: Students’ preferences in  
blended language learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 38(4), 19–34.  
12. Miftah, M. Z. (2024). Students’ perceptions of WhatsApp-based discussion in blended learning writing  
courses. Asian EFL Journal, 26(2), 55–80.  
13. Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2023). Establishing trustworthiness in  
qualitative research: Updated strategies. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 22(1).  
Page 4060  
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  
14. Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., & Duan, N. (2023). Purposeful sampling for  
qualitative data collection and analysis. Administration and Policy in Mental Health, 50(1), 150–162.  
15. Queen, A., & Klenke-Boush, E. (2024). Conducting semi-structured interviews in education research.  
International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 37(2), 210–225.  
16. Rahimi, M., & Fathi, J. (2023). Online interaction and learner engagement in blended EFL writing classes.  
Language Learning & Technology, 27(1), 1–21.  
17. Wang, M., & He, T. (2022). Blended learning and writing performance in tertiary ESL classes: Students’  
perceptions and outcomes. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35(7), 1476–1495.  
18. Zou, D., & Xie, H. (2022). Collaborative learning in blended EFL writing environments: Effects and  
perceptions. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 38(5), 1304–1320.  
Page 4061  
www.rsisinternational.org