Keywords

1 Introduction

The covid-19 pandemic has radically transformed the education sector. Since people around the globe are encouraged to isolate themselves to minimise the spread of the virus, information and communication technology (ICT) in higher education becomes essential, including in English as a second or foreign language (ESL/EFL) teaching. The ESL/EFL teaching which was previously conducted in face-to-face mode must move to the online environment by using the internet. Consequently, many teachers and students find it challenging to deal with such a virtual teaching and learning process, especially if they are not familiar with internet-based teaching and learning.

In Indonesia, education has been facing many challenges during the pandemic. Since most teachers and students are only familiar with the traditional teaching in the classroom and have minimal experience in implementing e-learning, as vastly reported by the media, the Indonesian educational system then runs as “trial and error” (Aji, 2020). For example, Arifa (2020) explained that in less than a month since the first application of e-learning in Indonesia, the Child Protection Commission has received 213 complaints, reporting bulk assignments as irritating learning experiences for students. Further, she described that in one of the reputable universities in Indonesia, only 66.9% of students comprehend the materials during online learning due to teachers’ inability to manage the online class effectively. Therefore, not only teachers and students but also parents/carers expect that the teaching and learning process can be conducted in the physical classroom environment again.

1.1 Blended Learning Proposal

Currently, as the covid-19 vaccination has started, the Indonesian Ministry of Education is looking at the possibility of combining online interactions with traditional face-to-face teaching in the classroom, known as blended learning (Bielousova, 2017; Lungu, 2013; Norberg et al., 2011; Staker & Horn, 2012). This upcoming policy is not only triggered by the fact that both the teachers and students want to return to school, but also by the government’s awareness of the advantages of internet-based teaching during the pandemic, especially for ESL/EFL teaching. Furthermore, as much research outside Indonesia has reported, blended learning can improve students’ four English skills—listening, speaking, reading, and writing (Banditvilai, 2016), promote autonomous learning (Busaya & Saovapa, 2018), and provide opportunities for students to do self-evaluation without pressure (González & Álvarez, 2007). Based on the rationale, the Indonesian Ministry of Education instructed the implementation of blended learning in the higher education setting, starting from January 2021 (Circular Letter of Learning Organisation in Higher Education, 2020; Circular Letter of Learning Organisation in Vocational Education, 2020) and encouraged blended learning to be permanently implemented in Indonesia once the covid-19 pandemic is over (Maharani, 2020).

The government’s policy seems to be promising to the development of English language teaching in Indonesia. However, teachers and students in Indonesia are not familiar with blended learning (Wuryaningsih et al., 2019). Although the design of distance education has been discussed and encouraged in Indonesia since 1950 (Zuhairi et al., 2006), combining distance education and classroom interaction is not an easy task. It requires depth studies. Besides, distance education developed in Indonesia does not require the internet as the primary source of learning. The decree of The Ministry of Education (number 107/U/2001) about distance education states that printed materials for self-study should be available, accompanied by any other media (Indonesian Minister of Education Decree, 2001). Hence, the state distance university, Indonesia Open University, still uses printed materials as the primary source of distance learning instead of multimodality (Darojat, 2016; Husain, 2020).

In Indonesia, limited equipment and internet access have been reported as fundamental boundaries of internet-based teaching (Muslem et al., 2018). Internet adoption for education in Indonesia is still being developed (Zen, 2019), and some districts are not ready for internet-based learning (Arifa, 2020). In addition, most Indonesian teachers’ ICT proficiency is low (Muslem et al., 2018) and they lack the ability to prepare online instruction (Sari et al., 2020). However, technology is developing. Currently, the Indonesian government focuses on encouraging the use of educational technology (Amri et al., 2019). Also, the government requires Indonesian universities to provide online learning like other universities in the world (Zen, 2019).

This reality suggests that online learning is not yet prevalent in Indonesia, so that merging online and classroom interactions becomes a big challenge, especially when people’s knowledge of it is limited. In Indonesian universities, EFL teachers’ interpretation and implementation of blended learning are still problematic. They may have their own interpretation of the blended learning concept, let alone consider how to implement it in EFL teaching and learning due to the lack of an explicit teacher training model (see Andrini et al., 2020; Lactona & Suryanto, 2021; Oktavianto et al., 2021; Mustadi et al., 2021).

In short, the government has proposed the implementation of blended learning in Indonesia and encouraged blended learning considered as a new pedagogical approach to embed in course design and development, including in English language education programs. However, how teachers should apply this approach in their teaching and learning processes is still not clear. The government has not provided a blended learning model for ESL/EFL teaching which guides teachers in using the approach. In other words, there is a pedagogical problem that remains overlooked in the government’s planning.

Research on the blended learning model, especially for EFL teaching in Indonesia, is still scarce. Although there is a high demand from the government to employ this approach, the interpretation of the blended learning concept is still different. For example, in the context of blended learning implementation during the covid-19 pandemic in Indonesia, the EBSCO database recorded four peer-reviewed journal articles using different definitions of blended learning. Blended learning is defined as the combination of asynchronous online learning and synchronous online webinar/synchronous face-to-face online interactions (see Andrini et al., 2020; Lactona & Suryanto, 2021); the combination of online interactions and hands-on learning in which the students individually observe the learning object in the field (see Oktavianto et al., 2021); and the mixture of various synchronous and asynchronous online learning experiences, including learning through social media, university platform, zoom application, and google classroom (see Mustadi et al., 2021).

Consequently, to fill the gap, a study that focuses on blended learning pedagogy is urgently required. It is crucial now to clarify what blended learning is and develop a precise model or contextualised pedagogical strategies of blended learning that will form meaningful EFL teaching and learning in the Indonesian higher education context. Since the Indonesian government has already instructed the use of blended learning while many Indonesian teachers’ knowledge is limited, it is essential to examine the existing effective models of blended learning from the global context and discuss the feasibility of model adoption/adaptation/modification in the Indonesian higher education setting. Furthermore, the researchers could probe whether the researchers can integrate the advantages of each existing model to develop a new model based on the socio-cultural context of Indonesia. Therefore, this paper aims to clarify what blended learning is and how this pedagogical approach fits the EFL teaching in the Indonesian higher education context. It is anticipated to scrutinise culturally appropriate blended pedagogical practices/recommendations for EFL teaching in Indonesia to address the current research gap.

2 Methodology

In this study, qualitative secondary research and document review were conducted to achieve the objective of the research. Largan and Morris (2019) explain that qualitative secondary research is “a systematic approach to the use of existing data to provide ways of understanding that may be additional to or different from the data’s original purpose” (p. 14). Even though Indonesian teachers have different interpretations of blended learning, this approach is not a new pedagogical concept in other countries, especially in western countries. Thus, the researchers decided to examine the existing literature related to the history and concept of blended learning to better understand the approach in the global context. In addition, the researchers reviewed the Indonesian government’s documents related to the regulation of blended learning implementation to assure the conformity of the global concept and the demand from the Indonesian government.

Furthermore, since blended learning is considered a new approach that even its interpretation is still problematic in Indonesia, the researchers investigated a wide range of studies on successful blended learning models from abroad. The researchers focused on research reporting the practices of the blended learning model in English language teaching in higher education settings. This review is beneficial to capture the best model of blended learning for EFL teaching in Indonesian higher education. In doing so, the researchers applied the data collection process suggested by Largan and Morris (2019), which included the data search process, selection process, and reduction process (if necessary) before then analysing the data.

2.1 Criteria for Data Search Process

To understand the concept of blended learning and probe how this approach should be implemented in EFL teaching, the researchers included all relevant books, journal articles, and research reports, including conceptual papers and experimental research articles. Also, the Indonesian government’s documents related to the policy of blended learning implementation during the covid-19 pandemic were accessed. To comprehend the concept of blended learning in the global context, the researchers examined relevant articles from various countries related to the history and the concept of blended learning since 2000. The researchers decided to use the year 2000 as the selection criteria because blended learning starts to be one of the pedagogical approaches in the early of that year (Güzer & Caner, 2014). Furthermore, the keywords of “history of blended learning” and “definition of blended learning” were used to search the data.

On the other hand, to explore the model of blended learning, the researchers focused on journal articles and research reports in the past ten years to confirm its update. However, as the researchers found that the updated research adopted or adapted the precursor model, the researchers referred to the original document of the model even though it was developed more than ten years ago. The researchers used the keyword “blended learning model” or “blended learning practice” with “English”, “English language”, and “English teaching” to gather the data related to how blended learning was implemented in English language teaching. In addition, even though there was no specific geographical location required, all the journal articles should be written in English, and the full text should be available.

2.2 Selection Procedure for Collection of the Literature

Since there is a large number of data available online, to reassure the quality of the selected data, the researchers applied a database-based searching strategy. The researchers used the EBSCO Host database because it is a specific education database accessible for the researchers and it provides peer-reviewed journal articles. To address the first aim of the study, the researchers first searched for a handbook of blended learning by looking at review articles of the handbook from the database. There were two handbooks of blended learning that were reviewed in the database. Then, the researchers accessed the printed or electronic version of the book. The reason for reviewing the handbook was that it was one of the definitive sources to comprehend blended learning. Besides, the researchers searched the relevant peer-reviewed journal articles from the EBSCO Host database by implementing some limiters mentioned in the selection criteria. After all, the researcher visited the official website of the Indonesian Ministry of Education and Culture to access the latest government documents related to the policy of blended learning application in the Indonesian higher education context. There were two recent regulations related to the instruction of employing blended learning in the higher education context.

To accommodate the second and third aim of the study, the researchers used the same database to search the peer-reviewed articles, research reports, and book chapters related to the model or pedagogical strategies of blended learning in English language teaching in the last 10 years.

2.3 Criteria for Inclusion and Exclusion

In the initial data searching process, 2 handbooks, 37 peer-reviewed journal articles, and 2 government documents to address the first aim of the study were obtained. Thus, in total, there were 41 data sources available. The obtained data were then initially reviewed by doing skimming and scanning to probe the relevancy of the information in the data with the aim of the research. The following questions guided the decision to include or exclude the data:

  1. a.

    Does the article present a detailed explanation of the blended learning concept or propose a new idea towards the approach?

  2. b.

    Is there any justification for the concept the author presents?

After the initial review, all the handbooks and government documents were considered relevant to address the aim of the research. However, only 11 out of 37 articles were considered relevant to be analysed further to address the first aim of the study due to duplication and relevancy of the content. From these 11 articles, the researchers found important information that was dug up and let the researchers include 3 more articles as the extended data. In total, there were 18 data sources to be analysed with respect to the first aim of the research, as presented in the following Table 1.

Table 1 Documents related to the concept of blended learning
Full size table

For the second and third aims of the study, 47 peer-reviewed journal articles matching the keywords were found. The researcher then conducted the initial review by focusing on these questions:

  1. a.

    Does the article provide a description or explanation of the model?

  2. b.

    Does the article explain the procedure or steps in organising the approach?

  3. c.

    Does the article provide the result of the implementation?

Besides its relevancy, the researcher used other criteria to include or exclude the data. First, the blended learning concept on the paper should be in line with the result of the discussion on the blended learning concept presented in this paper. Any articles on blended learning which define blended learning differently were not included in this study. Second, the context of the research should be the implementation of blended learning for English language teaching in higher education context or adult learners only. Third, the research design should be experimental, either qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-method. By examining the experimental research on how blended learning is implemented, the researchers could see the strengths and the weaknesses of the model, which could not be seen by looking at the conceptual paper. As a result of this inclusion and exclusion criteria, including deleting the duplicated articles, 30 articles were eliminated, resulting in 17 articles left to be analysed. Moreover, examining these 17 articles, the researchers were then directed to search and examine 5 more data sources related to the model of blended learning. Thus, 22 articles were analysed, as shown in Table 2.

Table 2 Search result of data related to blended learning models in English teaching
Full size table

In total, the researchers collected 40 various data sources related to the concept and implementation of blended learning in English language teaching. The researchers analysed and synthesised the data before reporting the results qualitatively. The exploration of blended learning practices was used to propose the blended learning model for EFL teaching in Indonesian higher education.

3 Defining Blended Learning

Before encouraging Indonesian educators, including EFL teachers, to implement blended learning, the concept should be defined clearly and understood. Otherwise, each teacher may have different interpretation about what to blend and how to blend, which may cause ineffective EFL teaching. In some cases, blended learning is also called mixed-mode learning, hybrid instruction/learning, combined learning, or technology-mediated enhanced learning (Moskal et al., 2013; Wang et al., 2015). This approach does not only have various interchangeably terms but also have various interpretations. Oliver and Trigwell (2005) argue that while the concept has been recognised, there is no clear picture about what to be blended. It can refer to the blending of e-learning and traditional learning, the blending of online and face-to-face learning, blending the media, blending the contexts, blending the learning theories, as well as blending the pedagogies. Therefore, as recent literature shows that blended learning has many definitions (Yu, 2015), it is essential to clarify its concept by reviewing the documents and research articles related to blended learning to gain the experts’ conceptual understanding of this approach.

From the 18 data sources the researchers obtained, it was found that the majority of the scholars perceive blended learning as the combination of face-to-face and online interactions (e.g., Alammary et al., 2014; Allen et al., 2007; Fanguy & Costley, 2021; Ferdig & Kennedy, 2014; Helms, 2014; Hrastinski, 2019; Hughes, 2008; Kleber, 2015; Picciano, 2009; Saichaie, 2020; Singleton, 2013). However, they were slightly different in employing the framework for their definitions. For example, Kleber (2015) and Alammary et al. (2014) emphasise that blended learning should be more than blending two learning modes. It should also comprise students’ control over path/pace, especially during online interactions. Thus, according to them, integrating web-based teaching in which the students are still fully controlled by the teacher during interactions cannot be classified as blended learning. More accurately, Hughes (2008) lists six considerations in defining blended learning, including whether the integration promotes the construction of knowledge, is based on the constructivist theoretical framework, explores the technology which accommodates student-centred learning, uses a broad range of media sources, transforms the role of learners and teachers, and is considered more effective than fully online or face-to-face teaching only.

While scholars such as Alammary et al. (2014), Fanguy and Costley (2021), and Ferdig and Kennedy (2014) define blended learning as the mixing of online and face-to-face interactions, Hrastinski (2019) and Sharma (2010) accept other interpretations of blended learning while holding that definition. They believe that in addition to the common interpretation, blended learning can also be comprehended as the combination of various instructional methods or technologies that can be used in either face-to-face or online settings. Even, Cronje (2020) recently proposed that blended learning should be understood as the pertinent implication of various theories or methods combined with technology. With this definition, blended learning may not be related to distance education, and any technology integration in the classroom can support the application of this approach.

These various interpretations are not a new issue in blended learning practices. The different interpretations of the approach have been documented since the emergence of the approach. One of the early studies on blended learning recorded that Cooney et al. (2000) used this notion to embark on a new arrangement of children’s classroom activities. In their study, they combined the children’s “play” element in prekindergarten and the children’s “work” element in a kindergarten/first-grade classroom. In this context, blended learning is associated with neither distance education nor technology integration in education. Rather, it blends two elements of learning, play, and work, which are still done in the classroom without technology aid. This initial concept is one of the reasons for the diversity of blended learning definitions among scholars. Therefore, when publishing a special issue journal on blended learning, Whitelock and Jelfs (2003) mention four definitions of blended learning, which are:

  1. a.

    the unified mixture of traditional learning with web-based online interaction (taking it out from the creation of Harrison).

  2. b.

    the blend of media and tools during the use of e-learning;

  3. c.

    the blend of self and group tasks that can be accommodated by online interactions

  4. d.

    the mix of some pedagogic approaches, without considering the use of learning technology (putting this definition from the idea of Driscoll).

Scrutinising all these definitions, the researchers believe that blended learning should be understood as the combination of online and traditional teaching instead of the blend of any media during e-learning or the blend of various pedagogical strategies. Once people promote online learning, it has included an alliance of many media and tools usage. It is an entity that normally arises when students deal with e-learning. Thus, if blended learning is defined this way, it can obscure its difference from online learning. Also, taking blended learning as the combination of methods or approaches in teaching is something that many educators in the world have commonly practised. It is common to apply multiple methods in teaching before the emergence of the blended learning concept. Even, when educators integrate technology during classroom interactions, as proposed by Cronje (2020), it still offers common strategies of traditional teaching that various media such as video or PowerPoint presentations are included to support the teaching and learning process. Thus, Helms (2014) emphasises that any face-to-face teaching that consolidates links, video, or other online sources should not be considered blended learning. In the same vein, Graham (2006) argues that defining blended learning in such a way will let any teaching and learning process be categorised as blended learning, will confer no specific character towards blended learning, and will present no rationales why people are interested in it.

On the other hand, the concept of integrating traditional teaching in the classroom and online interactions through the internet offers novelty, a new concept of education. Different from combining countless methods, approaches, or media, combining face-to-face with online interactions is not a system that has been commonly performed by practitioners before. Graham (2006) believes that when blended learning is defined this way, it brings out the historical side of the approach. In addition, it is utterly specific and can be differentiated easily from other technology integration designs in teaching. Therefore, in the global context, this definition is also confirmed by most of the blended learning scholars.

3.1 Blended Learning Distribution

Another issue related to the concept of blended learning is the fact that students have already learnt something through the internet with or without the teachers’ guidance or instruction. Therefore, some scholars propose a more detailed definition, covering the distribution of each learning mode. Allen et al. (2007) argue that to be defined as blended learning, a course should have 30–79% of online learning component. A course with lower online learning is regarded as traditional learning (0%) or web facilitated learning (1–29%), while a course with a higher online learning component is considered online learning. However, this distribution is not a rigid protocol on how blended learning should be arranged. Since blended learning is expected to produce better achievement compared to the traditional classroom teaching only and the independent computer-based course only (Motteram & Sharma, 2009), the organisation can vary based on the context. There is no “the best combination” among the unlimited mixture of possibilities (Moskal et al., 2013). Staker and Horn (2012) argue that if it is systematically designed with some components conducted online and some others taught in school, it can be regarded as blended learning, regardless they are equal or not. Similarly, Graham and Robison (2007) believe that blended learning can be organised by having a fixed schedule of either balance or unbalance online and classroom interactions.

In conclusion, the categorisation should not focus on the percentage of online and face-to-face interactions during the education process. Rather, it is about whether that combination is well-planned to achieve the expected learning outcome. In other words, to be called blended learning, the combination of online and face-to-face interactions should be done on purpose; it should be planned as a holistic teaching and learning process.

This definition is also in line with the blended learning concept proposed by the Indonesian government. The circular letter of the Indonesian government on the application of blended learning in Indonesia states that starting from January 2021, the teaching and learning in higher education could be done by employing hybrid learning or combining the face-to-face and online interactions by considering the health condition of both the educators and learners due to the covid-19 pandemic (see Circular letter of learning organisation in higher education, 2020; Circular letter of learning organisation in vocational education, 2020). In the two documents, there is no strict regulation on how online and traditional teaching should be divided. Each institution may develop the best combination of online and face-to-face interactions based on their needs. Also, the documents declare that the face-to-face teaching the university offers can be in the forms of various teaching activities such as lecture, practicum, studio, field practice, or other teaching activities.

Unfortunately, after reviewing the government’s documents related to the blended learning/hybrid learning instructions, the researchers found that the guideline for blended learning preparation and implementation in the document only covers technical stages related to covid-19 safety, such as the stages to follow the recommended health protocol of covid-19 pandemic during the face-to-face teaching, or the instruction to regularly report the condition of classroom interactions, primarily related to students and teachers’ health. In the circular letter, the government states that universities should provide facilities and infrastructures for blended learning. However, there is no information on how this approach should be implemented. There is no teaching model or guidance on how the teachers should employ this approach in their teaching and learning process.

4 Blended Learning Models in the World

Once the concept of blended learning is clearly defined, the next question is how this approach should be implemented to effectively improve EFL teaching. Since the instruction to apply blended learning is just encouraged recently in Indonesia, Indonesian EFL teachers need a model to follow. A model is generally a clarification of a theory (Gödek, 2004). Even though there is no best model of blended learning, the model is crucial, especially for those who have just known the approach. In teaching and learning, the teaching models associated with pedagogical strategies are essential as this helps teachers efficiently perform the teaching process. Joyce and Weil (1978) describe the teaching model as a plan pattern that deals with the guidance of choosing appropriate materials and provides relevant protocols to act as a teacher. Since a model has been developed by considering many important aspects, the imitator can gain better experience by reducing the possibility of creating unnecessary mistakes. Salisu and Ransom (2014) explain that “it would be exceedingly laborious, not to mention hazardous, if people had to rely solely on the effects of their own actions to inform them on what to do” (p. 54).

To find the most appropriate model to follow, the researchers examined various research articles globally which report the practices of blended learning application in English language teaching. From the 17 research articles reporting the implementation of blended learning in English language teaching, the researcher found that 3 researchers developed their models of blended learning by considering the needs of the teaching and learning process or learning theories/pedagogies, while 14 of them followed the blended learning model developed by the pioneer of blended learning. In detail, 11 articles adopt or adapt flipped classroom-blended learning proposed by the American scholars (see Yaroslavova et al., 2020; Mehring, 2018; Buitrago & Díaz, 2018; Wagner-Loera, 2018; Leis, 2018; Turan & Akdag-Cimen, 2019; Busaya & Saovapa, 2018; Nanclares & Rodríguez, 2016; Sung, 2015; Kvashnina & Martynko, 2016; Kadambaevna et al., 2021), 2 of them adopt or adapt the e-moderating model proposed by the European scholars (see Isakova et al., 2020; Farooq & Mahmood, 2014), and one of them adopt the skill-driven model proposed by the Asian scholar (see Kraft et al., 2013). Based on this finding, the researcher then searched for preeminent documents of those three models. It was found that one of them was developed more than ten years ago. However, since it was considered one of the leading models of blended learning, the data were included in the analysis process. The next section presents a review of blended learning models from America, Europe, and Asia the educators adopted or adapted.

4.1 The American Model and Its Implication

Since the initial research on computer learning, online learning, and blended learning is mostly conducted in the United States of America, it is not surprising that most influential blended learning models also come from this continent. In the education context, Staker and Horn (2012) suggest four blended learning models trusted to be the world’s most influential blended learning model. Previously, Staker (2011) observed 40 organisations in America that practised or planned to practise blended learning. By observing those 40 organisations, Staker proposed six blended learning models: face-to-face driver, rotation, flex, online lab, self-blend, and online driver model. After successfully drawing the scholars’ attention to the world by displaying the six models of blended learning, Staker conducted more studies on the blended learning model with her colleague. Staker and Horn (2012) then examined over 80 blended learning programs in the American K-12 sectors and revised her previous work by eliminating the two models due to their similarity with other models. They developed four models that have also been discussed and critiqued by 100 educators during the pre-conference at the International Association for K-12 Online Learning (iNACOL) Virtual School Symposium. The four blended learning models they proposed are the rotation model, flex model, self-blend model, and enriched-virtual model.

Among those all models, the flipped-classroom model, as part of the rotation model, is the most favoured model adopted by English teachers. Even, 78% of the articles the researchers reviewed implemented flipped classrooms in their English language teaching. As a new pedagogical method, the flipped-classroom model combines asynchronous video teaching, which should be accessed as homework before coming to the class, and active teaching and learning process in the classroom (Bishop & Verleger, 2013). According to Sit and Guo (2019), various videos students accessed during flipped classroom were beneficial in their learning process as they promoted authentic language materials. In the same vein, Mehring (2018) argues that this kind of model can create more communicative EFL teaching. Thus, Turan and Akdag-Cimen (2019) found that studies on flipped-classroom model in English language teaching have been improving since 2014.

4.2 The European Model and Its Implication

In the European context, the UK Open University can be considered the pioneer of online learning and blended learning. A prominent model of blended learning developed by Gilly Salmon was firstly used at this university. The five-stage model proposed by Gilly Salmon was initially designed for online learning, but then it is also relevant for the concept of blended learning. Salmon et al. (2010) described that Salmon studied, proposed, and tested the five-stage model in the 1990s before publishing it in 2000 and 2004. Her five-stage model covers the access and motivation stage, online socialisation stage, information exchange stage, knowledge construction stage, and development stage. Having developed this model, she collaborated with David Jaques to write how to employ this model in blended learning (see Jaques & Salmon, 2006). Their model has since then attracted the attention of many scholars in the UK and other countries.

In the Ukraine context, Isakova et al. (2020) designed a blended learning course for English language teaching in higher education by following Salmon’s five-stage model. They propose that there was a positive change in blended learning practices in the third trimester of its application. Furthermore, the model was proven to be successful in enhancing learners’ professional and communicative competence and activating their potential in learning. Even at the end of the academic year, the students were able to confidently communicate with overseas students through online media, read scientific journal articles written in English, and become part of the professional online association.

4.3 The Asian Model and Its Implication

In the Asia continent, the blended learning model introduced by Valiathan (2002) is deemed the most widely recognised model. Unlike other researchers, Valiathan (2002) introduced three blended learning model based on the learning objective. They can be described as follows:

  1. a.

    Skill-driven learning: it combines individual or independent learning with teacher support to develop certain knowledge and skills

  2. b.

    Attitude-driven learning: it integrates many activities and delivery media to develop certain behaviours

  3. c.

    Competency-driven learning: in this model, the combination of teacher support, knowledge management, and tools is aimed at developing workplace competencies.

This model has been adopted and studied by many scholars in various fields. One of the research articles the researchers reviewed was written by Kraft et al. (2013). They implemented skill-driven learning in Romania’s two military English courses. The first course adopted the skill-driven learning model with 40 (forty) hours over 8 (eight) weeks of self-study by using the CD, followed by 2 (two) weeks of face-to-face teaching and learning to develop skills in an integrated manner, especially speaking skill. The second English course was conducted for 10 (ten) weeks, in which 7 (seven) weeks were held online. After conducting a study in these two classes, they concluded that the face-to-face session and the live e-learning in this model avoid the students’ feeling of loneliness in the study. It then successfully helped the students in completing the self-paced modules.

Unfortunately, not all of the blended learning implementations that follow the available model produce a good result. In some cases, those models did not work well as expected. The next section discusses how the models worked or did not work in a particular setting.

5 Discussion

As previously reviewed, the available blended learning models are reported to be beneficial in EFL teaching. However, if the practice is closely examined, the success is only reported in areas where the model is developed. For example, in the United States of America (USA), many scholars have published how the flipped classroom model has successfully reinforced the English teaching and learning process. Buitrago and Díaz (2018) implemented a flipped classroom in English courses for undergraduate students at Universidad de la Sabana, Colombia. After the flipped-classroom implication, they concluded that this approach is practical to improve students’ writing in English and increases their motivation to exploit technology for language learning. Wagner-Loera (2018) conducted research at the University of Maryland, USA, by bringing the flipped elements to English class that previously employed the reduced cognitive load classroom (RCLC) approach. The research was conducted mainly in the reading, writing, and grammar course. The flipped classroom ran well because it let students learn primarily at home, and then once they came to the school, they had more time to practise what they had learnt. Wagner-Loera (2018) states that since the students can learn at their own pace, their cognitive load is reduced. As a result, the students become more autonomous in learning, creating better confidence and performance in English. In the same vein, other articles from Western countries reported the success of this model in their English language class (e.g. Kvashnina & Martynko, 2016; Nanclares & Rodríguez, 2016; Yaroslavova et al., 2020).

Unfortunately, when this approach is implemented outside the Americas, the outcome is not always satisfying. Leis (2018), who studied the implementation of flipped classroom in the Japanese education context, asserts that even though flipped classroom promotes students’ linguistic self-confidence, it may hinder the teachers and students from getting maximum advantages from their class time and may raise the teachers’ difficulty. Also, after reviewing 43 articles from Taiwan, China, Turkey, and Arabia, Turan and Akdag-Cimen (2019) found that besides its benefit in enhancing engagement and developing autonomy, flipped classroom offers many challenges reported in some research such as providing extra workload for both teachers and students, challenging to be implemented due to the internet or technology-related issues, and increasing students’ anxiety in particular English skill (writing). Likewise, when this model is implemented in Korea, Sung (2015) reported that although the students perceived the implementation positively, there were many difficulties both the teacher and students have to face related to test-oriented teaching, students inequity in terms of English proficiency and learning experience, lack of support from the university, as well as the more challenging effort and preparation for the educators. Research conducted by Busaya and Saovapa (2018) indicated that with modification, the flipped classroom provided a beneficial contribution in their English class, in Bangkok. However, in their paper, information on how they modified the model is not clear.

These different findings are reasonable because the flipped classroom model is developed in the western countries (USA) whose socio-cultural and educational contexts are different from those of Asian countries. For example, the study of Wagner-Loera (2018) found that the students’ independent learning before coming to the class made them more ready during the teaching and learning process in the classroom. Also, since they could learn individually based on their own pace during online learning, their cognitive load could be reduced. Therefore, the students became more autonomous and confident in using the language. Considering the American culture that tends to be more individualist (“Country comparison”, 2021), and thus impacts the students’ characters, implementing blended learning which requires students to perform independent learning will be likely unproblematic. This learning approach is aligned with the students’ individualist culture. However, when this approach was implemented in Asian countries with different students’ and teachers’ characteristics, the results were different. Even though blended learning was also reported to be able to develop students’ autonomy, Turan and Akdag-Cimen (2019) found that some students became more anxious in learning English. Also, the inequity of students’ learning experiences was reported to be an obstacle during the blended learning implementation (see Sung, 2015). Tempelaar et al. (2013) argue that cultural background gives a significant contribution to the success of the educational design. Their studies also revealed that cultural factors influenced the students’ learning approach and their earnestness in using online learning during blended learning practices. Hence, for finding an appropriate model for Indonesian EFL teaching, those models should not be adopted directly. Instead, those models should be regarded as references. However, the literature introducing and describing these blended learning models can provide teachers and educators in Indonesia with fundamental knowledge in theoretical concepts and valuable practical references when the researchers consider issues of English language teaching and learning in relation to blended learning. As advocated by McCarthy (2016), programs of blended learning that connect theories and blended learning training models and strategies can be developed and evaluated to build on a sound understanding of what generally constitutes best practices in language teaching and learning.

5.1 Examining Blended Learning Model Through the Lens of Socio-cultural Dimension

Taking into account the socio-cultural context before implementing a specific approach in education is imperative. Hofstede (2001) defines culture as “the collective programming of the mind that distinguishes the members of one group or category of people from another” (p. 9). Culture impacts people’s values which then influence their behaviour, including their way of teaching and learning. Joy and Kolb (2009) believe that culture influences learning style, especially in determining learners’ choice towards abstract or concrete conceptualisation. Therefore, in the direction of finding the appropriate model for Indonesian EFL teaching, the researcher then scrutinised the available models through the lens of the Indonesian socio-cultural context.

For this reason, the three of five socio-cultural dimensions proposed by Hofstede (2001), which are power distance, individualism vs collectivism, and uncertainty avoidance, are used to probe the characteristics of Indonesians, especially university students. These three cultural dimensions are employed as they are relevant to the education field. First of all, power distance describes the degree of relationship that is hierarchically ordered. Joy and Kolb (2009) explain that in the education sector, the community that is high on power distance acknowledges the teachers’ authority and wisdom more than the community that is low on power distance. Secondly, individualism vs collectivism presents how individuals prefer to act in the community, either as an individual or a group member. Joy and Kolb (2009) believe that “collectivism perhaps is the most widely used dimension to differentiate between cultures” (p. 74). In the field of education, students acting as an individual and group members influence their way of learning. Thirdly, uncertainty avoidance describes how the community prefers the structured condition rather than the unstructured one. Those who experience high uncertainty avoidance tend to expect a structured learning process with a clear teaching goal and schedule. According to this cultural dimension, Indonesia’s power distance is high, individualism is low, and uncertainty avoidance is moderate (“Country comparison”, 2021). With this information as a basis, the researcher then analysed whether the available model fits these cultural dimensions to put forward a culturally appropriate blended learning model.

The first model considered the most influential model in English teaching is the flipped classroom. This model encourages students to access a video or multiliteracies before coming to the classroom. The students are encouraged to learn individually through online interactions and then practise their skills during face-to-face teaching in the classroom. As the schedule of online and classroom interactions is clear that the students should have their online learning before going to school, the Indonesian students who have a moderate level of uncertainty avoidance will feel comfortable as they engage in a well-planned education system. Besides, getting ready before coming to the class is a good strategy as it will reduce the teacher’s explanation time in the classroom and give students more opportunity to practise the language. Since Indonesian students have minimal opportunities to use English outside the classroom (Nuraini, 2019; Sulistiyo, 2016), this model should promote improvement, especially in students’ productive English skills, including speaking and writing. Also, as Indonesian students’ proficiency varies, assigning them to learn independently using online instructions can allow them to learn based on their own learning pace and ability. Then, once they are ready with sufficient knowledge, they can learn together with their friends and teacher in the classroom. This concept supports the collectivism dimension that they have, so that this model has the potential to be the appropriate blended learning model for the Indonesian EFL students.

However, Indonesian students have a large power distance dimension. They tend to believe and give full respect to teachers so that they tend to always rely on teachers’ instruction. Consequently, requiring them to study independently before coming to the class will be very challenging. Cirocki et al. (2019) found that Indonesian students “were not yet ready to act independently, lacking various skills and competences typical of autonomous learners” (p. 13). Thus, providing a video for them to learn individually through the internet will not work for them. The students may have no idea on what to learn from the video or how to expand their knowledge related to the given video. As a result, they are still not ready to directly practise the language when they come to class. On the other hand, as the teachers’ explanation time has been reduced to provide more communicative activities, students may lose the opportunity to understand the language. In their study, Ghufron and Nurdianingsih (2020) found that flipped classrooms did not run well because the students find it hard to understand learning materials independently before coming to the class.

The second blended learning approach to be discussed is the five stages, including the phases of access and motivation, online socialisation, information exchange, knowledge construction, and development. This model guides to perform the best role of a moderator or instructor when implementing blended learning pedagogical strategies in different phases of the teaching–learning process. These five stages are believed to be beneficial to organise an effective blended learning program. Since this model focuses on what teachers should do to assist students during the blended learning program, it is suitable for Indonesia’s power distance value. Unlike the flipped-classroom model which requires students to solely work on their own learning before coming to the class, this model provides instructions for teachers to encourage and assist the students during the teaching and learning process. Such a model is urgently needed by Indonesian students.

Unfortunately, even though Jaques and Salmon (2006) have explained how this model can be implemented in blended learning practices, this model does not clearly point out how face-to-face interactions should be arranged. Therefore, practitioners should conduct some adaptation once they decide to adhere to this model for their blended learning class. Heinze and Procter (2004) argue that since the side of traditional teaching is not included in the model, the implication of this model for blended learning becomes finite. As Indonesian students prefer to learn in a group rather than individually, explicit instructions on how face-to-face teaching should be conducted should also be highlighted. Otherwise, it is not only irrelevant with their collectivism value but also may create uncomfortableness due to the uncertainty of traditional classroom experiences.

Finally, the third model is the skill-driven learning model proposed by Valiathan (2002). This model is adapted to English teaching as it is designed to develop specific knowledge and skills. Generally, when it is implemented in EFL teaching, it will combine individual or independent learning with the teacher’s support. Emphasising the role of the teacher in supporting students is the advantage of this model that is in line with the power distance value of Indonesian students. However, as it focuses more on the interaction of students as an individual and the teacher, it may not strongly support the value of collectivism in Indonesia. In Indonesia, as students have high collectivist values, the students not only need a teacher to provide guidance but also need to meet and learn the foreign language together with their friends. Thus, classroom interactions as the place to communicate using the target language should also be planned well.

5.2 Recommendations for EFL Teaching in Indonesian Higher Education

Since blended learning has been practised and examined by many academics/researchers in the world, especially those who come from Western countries, it is acknowledged that some blended learning models have been developed and tested satisfactorily to be implemented in the English language teaching context. However, it is also important to notice that as they are developed in Western countries which have socio-cultural context different from that of Indonesia, evaluation and adjustment may need to be done and explored.

Considering the fact that practising the language may significantly improve students’ language proficiency, it is not surprising that flipped classroom is widely adopted or adapted by many scholars due to its advantages in providing more opportunities to practise the language in the classroom. However, since this model does not really support the power distance value during its implementation, this model should be integrated with other models to fit the Indonesian students’ needs. The researchers propose the integrated blended learning model for EFL teaching in Indonesian higher education by considering the benefits and suitability of each existing model in accordance with the Indonesian socio-cultural context. The integration of the blended learning model can be described as follows (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1
figure 1

Integrated blended-learning model for EFL teaching in Indonesian higher education

Full size image

Generally, students will experience the blend of online and face-to-face teaching in three stages. In the first stage, adapting the flipped-classroom concept, the students should prepare themselves before coming to the class by learning the materials online. However, since the students have large power distance dimensions and may find it challenging to study without a clear guidance or instruction from teachers, this online session should be assisted by the teacher. The idea of putting together the individual learning and teacher’s support in this stage is adapted from the concept of the skill-driven blended learning model proposed by Valiathan (2002). Furthermore, during this stage, the teacher will assist the students by adapting the five-stage model proposed by Jaques and Salmon (2006). The teacher should assist the students with the motivation issue, access, online socialisation, information exchange, knowledge construction, and development. This stage can be either synchronous or asynchronous, but the plan should be explained to the students before the program runs as they may not be comfortable with unexpected things.

After that, the students should experience the second stage, in which they individually and independently access any additional information related to the materials through asynchronous online learning. Because the students have received instructional scaffolding and support from the teacher in the previous stage, it is expected that they will be able to develop their independent learning skills and become autonomous learners while improving their English.

Finally, the last stage will be face-to-face interactions in the classroom. In this stage, as the students have received much support from the teacher during the English online lecture and individual online study, they should be able to practise the target language with their friends in the classroom and to engage in various classroom activities that give them more opportunities to enhance their English skill.

This integrated blended learning model should provide a theoretical and practical framework for the design of a teaching model for EFL teaching in Indonesian higher education context. As scholars further support, the idea of using digital humanities pedagogy, as a hot topic in second language education today, is to involve teachers to position themselves at the intersections of humanities and information technologies and investigate how blended methodologies can be applied to transform and enhance teaching–learning in language education (Sit & Chen, 2019; Sit & Guo, 2019).

6 Conclusion

The rapid development of ICT and the covid-19 pandemic have pushed the Indonesian government to consider blended learning as a new approach for Indonesian higher education, including in the EFL teaching context. However, regardless of its popularity, many Indonesian EFL teachers in Indonesia find it challenging to understand and implement this approach. Through the literature studies, it can be proposed that blended learning should be understood as the systematic planned of online and face-to-face teaching and learning processes in which the distribution of each mode may vary depending on the needs and objective of teaching. For EFL teaching in Indonesian higher education, the researchers propose an integrated blended learning model developed through the analysis and synthesis of available references on effective blended learning models and by considering the socio-cultural context of Indonesia. The integrated model covers three stages of the EFL teaching and learning process: an asynchronous or synchronous online learning with teacher’s assistance by adapting the five-stage model (access and motivation, online socialisation, information exchange, knowledge construction, development), individual online learning, and classroom activities. These stages should be conducted in order with a clear schedule to provide comfortable teaching and learning setting.

After all, the proposed integrated model should provide a beneficial contribution to the blended learning practices in Indonesian EFL teaching. As the Indonesian government has encouraged the implementation of blended learning, the results of this research should be used as one of the primary references for English practitioners in Indonesia. Also, the proposed model should be a useful reference for any English practitioners, especially those who come from Southeast Asian countries, as they may share similar socio-cultural contexts with Indonesian practitioners.