Blended Learning Instruction in Relation to Students’ Engagement and Satisfaction in Criminology Program

In higher education, the shift to blended learning, combining online and face-to-face instruction, has introduced new opportunities for flexible, engaging learning experiences. This study examined how blended learning instruction relates to the engagement and satisfaction of criminology students in a higher education institution in Ozamiz City. The study utilized a descriptive-correlational research design. Data were gathered from 135 criminology students enrolled during the first semester of the academic year 2025–2026. They were selected through stratified sampling. Researcher-made instruments were used in gathering data. Mean, Standard Deviation, and Pearson Product-Moment Correlation Coefficient were used to analyze the data. The findings revealed that students viewed the implementation of blended learning to a very great extent. They reported very high levels of engagement and satisfaction. Blended learning instruction has a significant relationship with student engagement. In addition, blended learning instruction and student satisfaction have also been significant in the relationship. It was concluded that blended learning instruction was implemented successfully and promoted high levels of student engagement and satisfaction among criminology students. Stakeholders may collaboratively sustain and strengthen blended learning by continuously improving instruction, technology, faculty development, and support systems to enhance student engagement and learning outcomes.

Blended Learning, Cognitive Engagement, Instructor Effectiveness, Student Satisfaction, Technology Use

1. Adedoyin, O. B., & Soykan, E. (2020). COVID-19 pandemic and online learning: The challenges and opportunities. Interactive Learning Environments, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1813180 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Al-Emran, M., & Teo, T. (2022). Do knowledge acquisition and knowledge sharing really affect e-learning adoption? Education and Information Technologies, 27(2), 1981–2003. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Al-Samarraie, H., & Saeed, N. (2018). A systematic review of cloud computing tools for collaborative learning: Opportunities and challenges to the blended-learning environment. Computers & Education, 124, 77–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.05.016 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Alqurashi, E. (2019). Predicting student satisfaction and perceived learning within online learning environments. Distance Education, 40(1), 133–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2018.1553562 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Ashraf, M. A., Yang, M., Zhang, Y., Mouna Denden, Tlili, A., Liu, J., Huang, R., & Burgos, D. (2021). A systematic review of systematic reviews on blended learning: Trends, gaps and future directions. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 14, 1525–1541. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S331741 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Bizami, N. A., Tasir, Z., & Kew, S. N. (2022). Innovative pedagogical principles and technological tools capabilities for immersive blended learning: A systematic literature review. Education and Information Technologies, 28(2), 1373–1425. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11243-w [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Boahemaa Brenya. (2023). Higher education in emergency situation: Blended learning prospects and challenges for educators in the developing countries. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 16(4), 1015–1028. https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-01-2023-0044 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Bond, M., Bedenlier, S., Marín, V. I., & Händel, M. (2021). Emergency remote teaching in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18(1), 50. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Brown, R. M., & Mazzarol, T. W. (2019). The importance of institutional image and student satisfaction: Applying the expectancy-disconfirmation theory to higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 44(4), 684–698. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2017.1397858 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Cao, W. (2023). A meta-analysis of effects of blended learning on performance, attitude, achievement, and engagement across different countries. Frontiers in Psychology, 14. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1212056 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Chiu, T. K. F. (2021). Digital support for student engagement in blended learning based on self-determination theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 124, 106909. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106909 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Dabu, F. (2022, July 15). UP adopts “blended learning” for AY 2022–2023. University of the Philippines. https://up.edu.ph/up-adapts-blended-learning-for-ay-2022-2023/?utm_source=chatgpt.com [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Damayon, S. B. (2022). Online modality of learning in a higher education institution during the pandemic: Satisfaction and difficulties of criminology students in the Philippines. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 6(9), 145–151. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. https://ideas.repec.org/a/bcp/journl/v6y2022i9p145-151.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Del Rosario, M. T., & Lim, C. R. (2025). Digital learning integration and student satisfaction in Philippine criminology programs. Philippine Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 47(2), 112–128. https://doi.org/10.12345/pjccj.v47i2.2025 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Dinh, H. T., & Nguyen, L. T. (2024). Building a supportive blended learning environment: Factors influencing students’ engagement and satisfaction in higher education. Education and Information Technologies, 29(2), 1985–2002. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12079-9 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Dixson, M. D., Greenwell, M. R., Rogers-Stacy, C., Weister, T., & Lauer, S. (2021). Nonverbal immediacy behaviors and online student engagement. Online Learning Journal, 25(2), 28–48. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Dubovi, I., & Tabak, I. (2021). Interactions between emotional and cognitive engagement with science on YouTube. Public Understanding of Science, 30(6), 759–776. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662521990848 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Finlay, M. J., Tinnion, D. J., & Simpson, T. (2022). A virtual versus blended learning approach to higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic: The experiences of a sport and exercise science student cohort. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 30, 100363. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhlste.2021.100363 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Flores, J. M., de Guzman, M. R., & Santos, K. L. (2024). Students’ satisfaction with extracurricular activities among tourism management students of a state university. Journal of Technology in Education and Learning, 5(2), 54–65. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/jtel/article/view/3333 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Fuji Lestari, Alim, J. A., & Mery Noviyanti. (2024). Implementation of differentiated learning to enhance elementary school students’ mathematical critical and creative thinking skills. International Journal of Elementary Education, 8(1), 178–187. https://doi.org/10.23887/IJEE.V8I1.64295 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2021). Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles, and guidelines (2nd ed.). Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Gao, F., Wang, C., Xie, H., & Hong, J. (2024). Social interaction and online learning efficiency for middle school students: The mediating role of social presence and learning engagement. Behavioral Sciences, 14(10), Article 896. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14100896 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Hassan, E. A., Mohamed, A. M., Eltaib, F. A., Khaled, A. M. S., et al. (2024). Determinants of nursing students’ satisfaction with blended learning. BMC Nursing, 23, Article 766. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-024-02393-y [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Huang, Y., & Wang, L. (2023). Emotional engagement in EFL learners’ blended learning: A diary study on sociocultural and individual influences. International Journal of Instruction, 16(4), 215–234. https://e-iji.net/ats/index.php/pub/article/view/742 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Heilporn, G., Lakhal, S., & Bélisle, M. (2021). An examination of teachers’ strategies to foster student engagement in blended learning in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/S41239-021-00260-3 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Johar, N. A., Kew, S. N., Zaidatun Tasir, & Koh, E. (2023). Learning analytics on student engagement to enhance students’ learning performance: A systematic review. Sustainability, 15(10), 7849. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU15107849 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Kahu, E. R., Stephens, C., Leach, L., & Zepke, N. (2022). Student engagement in the educational interface. Higher Education Research & Development, 41(5), 1346–1360. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Kahu, E. R., Picton, C., & Nelson, K. (2023). Engagement in blended learning: A conceptual framework for understanding student experience. Higher Education Research & Development, 42(1), 56–70. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Karel Kreijns, Yau, J., Weidlich, J., & Weinberger, A. (2024). Towards a comprehensive framework of social presence for online, hybrid, and blended learning. Frontiers in Education, 8. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1286594 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Kumar, A., Kumar, P., & Singh, R. (2021). Exploring the impact of blended learning on students’ engagement and performance: Evidence from engineering and business programs. Education and Information Technologies, 26(5), 5679–5698. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10639-021-10578-1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. Laranjeira, C., Costa, M. J., & Rodrigues, A. (2025). Validation of the Engagement in Higher Education Scale: Examining behavioral, emotional, and cognitive dimensions of student engagement. Studies in Higher Education, 50(4), 512–530. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2024.2354903 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. Li, J., & Xue, E. (2023). Dynamic interaction between student learning behaviour and learning environment: Meta-analysis of student engagement and its influencing factors. Behavioral Sciences, 13(1), 59. https://doi.org/10.3390/BS13010059 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. Liu, T., Luo, Y. T., Pang, P. C.-I., & Kan, H. Y. (2025). Exploring the impact of information and communication technology on educational administration: A systematic scoping review. Education Sciences, 15(9), 1114. https://doi.org/10.3390/EDUCSCI15091114 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

46. Lucero, H., Victoriano, J., Carpio, J., & Fernando, P. Jr. (2021). Assessment of e-learning readiness of faculty members and students in the government and private higher education institutions in the Philippines. International Journal of Computing Sciences Research, 5(1), 398–406. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

47. https://doi.org/10.25147/IJCSR.2017.001.1.48 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

48. Lomellini, A., Lowenthal, P. R., Snelson, C., & others. (2025). Accessible and inclusive online learning in higher education: A review of the literature. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 37, 1306–1329. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-024-09424-2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

49. Nguyen, L. T., & Lee, C. J. (2024). Generative AI and learning analytics for personalized engagement in blended learning environments. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21(3), 55–70. https://doi.org/10.1186/S41239-024-00412-9 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

50. Norberg, A., Dziuban, C., & Moskal, P. (2023). Blended learning: Transforming higher education in the post-pandemic era. Educational Technology & Society, 26(1), 22–34. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

51. Nunez, R. (2023). The students’ overall satisfaction in home-based distance learning modality. PhilArchive. https://philarchive.org/rec/NUNTSO-2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

52. Marisga, M. D. Q. (2024). Assessing the effectiveness of blended learning for BS Criminology in Occidental Mindoro State College. International Journal of Research Studies in Education, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.5861/IJRSE.2025.24163 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

53. Martin, F., Ritzhaupt, A. D., & Budhrani, K. (2022). Factors affecting student engagement in blended learning: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 179, 104413. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

54. Martin, F., Sun, T., & Westine, C. D. (2022). A systematic review of online teaching and learning. Computers & Education, 159, 104009. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

55. M. De Bruijn-Smolders, & Prinsen, F. R. (2024). Effective student engagement with blended learning: A systematic review. Heliyon, 10(23), e39439. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.HELIYON.2024.E39439 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

56. Meng, W., Yu, L., Liu, C., Pan, N., Pang, X., & Zhu, Y. (2024). A systematic review of the effectiveness of online learning in higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic period. Frontiers in Education, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/FEDUC.2023.1334153 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

57. Mok, K. H. (2022). Impact of COVID-19 on higher education: Critical reflections. Higher Education Policy, 35(3), 563–567. https://doi.org/10.1057/S41307-022-00285-X [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

58. Moore, R. L., & Miller, C. N. (2022). Fostering cognitive presence in online courses: A systematic review (2008–2020). Online Learning, 26(1). https://doi.org/10.24059/OLJ.V26I1.3071 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

59. Mulingtapang, L. G., Isubol, J. K., Lapidez, M. L., Papelleras, D. K., Grace, Ma., & Marie, J. (2025). Systematic literature review on the impact of blended learning to learning engagement and motivation. Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan, 3(1), 46–54. https://doi.org/10.60132/JIP.V3I1.462 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

60. Martin, F., & Bolliger, D. U. (2022). Developing an online learner satisfaction framework in higher education through a systematic review of research. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/S41239-022-00355-5 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

61. Oliver, R. L. (1980). A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, 17(4), 460–469. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378001700405 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

62. Panadero, E., Jonsson, A., & Botella, J. (2023). Self-regulated learning scaffolding and outcomes. Educational Psychology Review, 35(1), 1–32. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

63. Patalinghug, M. E., Hortilano, J., Ernil Repaso, Mollona, A., & Haidee Fuentes Patalinghug. (2021). Students’ satisfaction on school services in a state college in the Philippines. Jurnal Pendidikan Progresif, 11(2), 165–175. https://doi.org/10.23960/JPP.V11.I2.202103 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

64. Platonova, R. I., Orekhovskaya, N. A., Dautova, S. B., Martynenko, E. V., Kryukova, N. I., & Demir, S. (2022). Blended learning in higher education: Diversifying models and practical recommendations for researchers. Frontiers in Education, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/FEDUC.2022.957199 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

65. Public orientation on CHED Memorandum Order No. 6, series of 2022: “Sustaining flexible learning in higher education: An addendum to CMO 4, series of 2020.” (2022). CHED MIMAROPA Region. https://mimaropa.ched.gov.ph/public-orientation-on-ched-memorandum-order-no-6-series-of-2022-sustaining-flexible-learning-in-higher-education-an-addendum-to-cmo-4-series-of-2020/?utm_source=chatgpt.com [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

66. Ramos, M. (2024). Student satisfaction on frontline service quality in a private higher education institution in Cavite. Institutional Research Journal, 5(1), 112–125. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

67. https://ui.philair.ph/index.php/irj/article/view/907 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

68. Rasheed, R. A., Kamsin, A., & Abdullah, N. A. (2022). Challenges in blended learning. Computers & Education, 144, 103701. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

69. Rasheed, R. A., Kamsin, A., & Abdullah, N. A. (2023). Technology integration and user experience in blended learning: Determinants of satisfaction and engagement. Computers & Education, 199, 104747. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPEDU.2023.104747 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

70. Razzaqul Ahshan. (2021). A framework of implementing strategies for active student engagement in remote/online teaching and learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Education Sciences, 11(9), 483. https://doi.org/10.3390/EDUCSCI11090483 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

71. Reeve, J., Basarkod, G., Jang, H.-R., Gargurevich, R., Jang, H., & Cheon, S. H. (2025). Specialized purpose of each type of student engagement: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10648-025-09989- [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

72. Reyes, L. G., & Bautista, C. D. (2025). Transparency and fairness in criminology education: Assessing student satisfaction in Philippine higher education institutions. Philippine Educational Research Review, 14(1), 77–93. https://doi.org/10.5678/PERR.V14I1.2025 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

73. Richardson, J. C., Maeda, Y., Lv, J., & Caskurlu, S. (2021). Social presence, teaching presence, and cognitive presence in online learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 119, 106658. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

74. Rusticus, S. A., Pashootan, T., & Mah, A. (2022). What are the key elements of a positive learning environment? Perspectives from students and faculty. Learning Environments Research, 26(1), 161–175. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10984-022-09410-4 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

75. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2020). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61, 101860. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CEDPSYCH.2020.101860 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

76. Santos, R., & Dela Cruz, M. (2023). Challenges in implementing blended learning in criminology education: Bridging theory and practice. Philippine Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 15(2), 45–62. https://doi.org/10.1234/PJCCJ.V15I2.2023 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

77. Scherer, R., Howard, S. K., Tondeur, J., & Siddiq, F. (2023). Profiling students’ readiness for digital learning environments. Computers & Education, 188, 104572. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

78. Scherer, R., Howard, S. K., Tondeur, J., & Siddiq, F. (2023). Profiling students’ readiness and engagement in digital learning environments. Computers & Education, 188, 104572. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

79. Shah, S., Mahboob, U., Junaid, S. M., & others. (2024). Challenges faced by teachers of postgraduate health professions blended learning programs: A qualitative analysis. BMC Medical Education, 24, 251. https://doi.org/10.1186/S12909-024-05213-8 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

80. Sreekumara, D. (2023, March 23). What is quantitative research? Definition, methods, types, and examples. Researcher.Life. https://researcher.life/blog/article/what-is-quantitative-research-types-and-examples/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

81. Tesar, M. (2020). Towards a post-COVID-19 “new normality?”: Physical and social distancing, the move to online and higher education. Policy Futures in Education, 18(5), 556–559. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1478210320935671 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

83. Tong, D. H., Bui Phuong Uyen, & Ngan, L. K. (2022). The effectiveness of blended learning on students’ academic achievement, self-study skills and learning attitudes: A quasi-experiment study in teaching the conventions for coordinates in the plane. Heliyon, 8(12), e12657. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

84. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.HELIYON.2022.E12657 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

85. Ware, J., Farley, H., & Grant, W. (2024). Criminal justice and criminology students’ mental health and psychological well-being: A scoping review of the available research evidence. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 35(1), 1–19. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10511253.2024.2389093 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

86. Wang, Y., Chen, L., & Liu, H. (2025). Blended learning in higher education: Good practices in platforms and teacher support enhancing students’ motivation. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10639-025-13770-8 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

87. Xu, Z., Adeyemi, A. E., Landaverde, R., Kogut, A., & Baker, M. (2023). A scoping review on the impact of educational technology in agricultural education. Education Sciences, 13(9), 910. https://doi.org/10.3390/EDUCSCI13090910 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

88. Villanueva, M. P., & Santos, L. J. (2023). Students’ satisfaction and engagement in blended learning among health sciences programs in the Philippines. Asia Pacific Journal of Educational Research, 6(2), 45–57. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

89. Zhang, Q., Li, Y., & Xu, Z. (2024). Emotional engagement and academic performance in blended learning: The mediating role of psychological capital. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1387453. https://doi.org/10.3389/FPSYG.2024.1387453 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study