Pedagogy of Effective Blended Learning



The work is aimed at presenting a model of effective blended learning pedagogy, its values, key factors of effective blended learning, as well as recommendations for teachers and trainers. A review of the literature in recent years is presented. The basic principles of effective blended learning: the student is at the center of the educational process, focus not only on knowledge, but also on competencies, personalization, personal responsibility for the results of their own activities. The results obtained make it possible to say that the effectiveness of blended learning is influenced by design from a goal and a flexibility, mastery based learning and differentiation, personalization, learning communities, active and interactive learning, a change in the assessment system, educational independence and self-regulated learning, self-efficacy and the use of diagnostic tests. There is evidence that the modern concept of blended learning includes a change in pedagogical approach, although in widespread use it continues to be a combination of online and face-to-face learning. It is noted that modern research is aimed at identifying parameters that affect the effectiveness of blended learning, such as self-regulation and self-efficacy of students, the use of differentiated teaching by teachers, formative assessment, active learning. Recommendations are given for teachers and methodists to improve the effectiveness of blended learning.

General Information

Keywords: blended learning, blended online learning, pedagogy of blended learning, flipped learning, inverted learning, flipped classroom, active learning, personalization

Journal rubric: Educational Psychology and Pedagogical Psychology

Article type: review article


For citation: Andreyeva N.V. Pedagogy of Effective Blended Learning [Elektronnyi resurs]. Sovremennaia zarubezhnaia psikhologiia = Journal of Modern Foreign Psychology, 2020. Vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 8–20. DOI: 10.17759/jmfp.2020090301. (In Russ., аbstr. in Engl.)


  1. Andreeva N.V. Praktika smeshannogo obucheniya: istoriya odnogo eksperimenta [Blended Learning Practice in Russia: The History of one Experiment]. Psikhologicheskaya naukaiobrazovanie = Psychological Science and Education, 2018. Vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 20–28. DOI:10.17759/pse.2018230302 (In Russ.).
  2. Andreeva N.V., Rozhdestvenskaya L.V., Yarmakhov B.B. Shag shkoly v smeshannoeobuchenie [School's step into blended learning]. Moscow: BukiVedi, 2016. 280 p.(In Russ.).
  3. Margolis A.A. Chto smeshivaet smeshannoe obuchenie? [What Kind of Blending Makes Blended Learning?]. Psikhologicheskaya nauka I obrazovanie = Psychological Science and Education, 2018. Vol. 23, no. 3, p. 5–19. DOI:10.17759/pse.2018230301(In Russ.).
  4. Materialy treka drugaya shkola. Karantin. Konfernetsiismeshannoeobuchenie [Track materials other school. Quarantine. Blended learning conferences] [Elektronnyi resurs]. Smeshannoe obuchenie v Rossii [Blended learning in Russia]. URL: (Accessed 30.08.2020). (In Russ.).
  5. Smeshannoeobuchenie v Rossii [Blended Learning in Russia] [Elektronnyi resurs]. URL: (Accessed 30.08.2020). (In Russ.).
  6. Allen I.E., Seaman J. Class Differences: Online Education in the United States [Elektronnyi resurs]. Babson Park: Babson Survey Research group; The Sloan Consortium, 2010. 30 p. URL: (Accessed 30.08.2020).
  7. Bergmann J., Sams A. Flipped learning: Gateway to student engagement. Washington DC: International Society for Technology in Education, 2014. 182 p.
  8. Blended Learning [Elektronnyi resurs]. Christensen Institute, 2020. URL: (Accessed 30.08.2020).
  9. Blended learning: Personalizing Education for Students [Elektronnyi resurs]. Coursera Inc, 2020. URL: (Accessed 30.08.2020).
  10. Bloom B.S. The 2 Sigma Problem: The Search for Methods of Group Instruction as Effective as. One-to-One Tutoring [Elektronnyi resurs]. Educational Researcher, 1984. Vol. 13, no. 6, pp. 4–16. URL: (Accessed 30.08.2020).
  11. Boelens R., De Wever B., Voet M. Four key challenges to the design of blended learning: A systematic literature review. Educational Research Review, 2017. Vol. 22, pp. 1–18. DOI:10.1016/j.edurev.2017.06.001
  12. Bray B., McClaskey K. Personalization vs Differentiation vs Individualization [Elektronnyi resurs]. 2013. 13 p. Alberta. URL: (Accessed 30.08.2020).
  13. Brodersen R.M., Melluzzo D. Summary of research on online and blended learning programs that offer differentiated learning options [Elektronnyi resurs]. Washington, DC: Regional Education Laboratory, 2017. 23 p. URL: (Accessed 30.08.2020).
  14. Pane J.F. et al. Continued progress: Promising evidence on personalized learning [Elektronnyi resurs]. Santa Monica, California, USA: RAND Corporation, 2015. 56 p. URL: (Accessed 05.10.2020).
  15. Cronje Johannes C. Towards a New Definition of Blended Learning [Elektronnyi resurs]. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 2020. Vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 114–121. URL: (Accessed 30.08.2020).
  16. Driscoll M. Blended learning: Let’s get beyond the hype [Elektronnyi resurs]. E-Learning, 2002. Vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 1–3. URL: (Accessed 30.08.2020).
  17. K-12 Education Team. Early Progress: Interim Report on Personalized Learning [Elektronnyi resurs]. Santa Monica, California, USA: RAND Corporation, 2014. 32 p. URL: (Accessed 30.08.2020).
  18. Pane J.F. et al. Effectiveness of cognitive tutor algebra I at scale. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 2014. Vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 127–144. DOI:10.3102/0162373713507480
  19. Erbil D.G. A Review of Flipped Classroom and Cooperative Learning Method Within the Context of Vygotsky Theory [Elektronnyi resurs]. Frontiers in Psychology,2020. Vol. 11, article number 1157. URL: (Accessed 30.08.2020).
  20. U.S. Department of Education. Future Ready Learning: Reimagining the Role of Technology in Education [Elektronnyi resurs]. Washington, D.C.: Office of Educational Technology, 2016. URL: (Accessed 30.08.2020).
  21. Garrison D.R., Kanuka H. Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. Internet and Higher Education, 2004. Vol. 7, pp. 95–105. DOI:10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001
  22. Graham C. R., Allen S., Ure D. Benefits and challenges of blended learning environments. Encyclopedia of Information Science and Technology, 2005, pp. 253–259. DOI:10.4018/978-1-59140-553-5.ch047
  23. Graham C.R. Blended learning systems: Definition, current trends and future directions. InBonk C.J., Graham C.R. (eds.), The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs. San Francisco: Pfeiffer, 2006, pp. 3–21.
  24. Titov S. et al. Integrative Assessment Framework in Blended Learning. TEM journal. Technology Education Management Informatics, 2019. Vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 768–774. DOI:10.18421/TEM83-10
  25. Lee H.S., Anderson J. Student Learning: What Has Instruction Got to Do With It? Annual review of psychology, 2012. Vol. 64, pp. 445–469. DOI:10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143833
  26. Newswire P.R. Interactive Learning Centers Announces Name Change to EPIC Learning [Elektronnyi resurs]. 1999. URL: (Accessed 30.08.2020).
  27. Park H., Shea P. A review of ten-year research through co-citation analysis: Online learning, distance learning and blended learning. Online Learning, 2020. Vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 225–244. DOI:10.24059/olj.v24i2.2001
  28. Shu-Chen Cheng, Gwo-Jen Hwan, Chiu-Lin Lai Critical research advancements of flipped learning: a review of the top 100 highly cited papers. Interactive Learning Environments, 2020. DOI:10.1080/10494820.2020.1765395
  29. Staker H., Horn M.B. Classifying K-12 blended learning [Elektronnyi resurs]. Innosight Institute, 2012. URL: (Accessed 30.08.2020).
  30. Thai Ngoc Thuy, De Wever Bram, Valcke Martin The impact of a flipped classroom design on learning performance in higher education: Looking for the best «blend» of lectures and guiding questions with feedback. Computers & Education, 2017. Vol. 107, pp. 113–126. DOI:10.1016/j.compedu.2017.01.003
  31. Visible Learning [Elektronnyi resurs]. Corwin Visible Learning Plus. URL: (Accessed 30.08.2020).
  32. Walkington Candace, Bernacki Matthew L. Appraising research on personalized learning: Definitions, theoretical alignment, advancements, and future directions. Journal of research on technology in education, 2020. Vol. 52, no. 3, pp. 235–252. DOI:10.1080/15391523.2020.1747757
  33. Wang M., Wegerif R. From active‐in‐behaviour to active‐in‐thinking in learning with technology. British Journal of Educational Technology, 2019. Vol. 50, no. 5, pp. 2178–2180. DOI:10.1111/bjet.12874
  34. Wiliam D. Formative assessment: Getting the focus right. Educational assessment, 2006. Vol. 11, no. 3–4, pp. 283–289. DOI:10.1080/10627197.2006.9652993

Information About the Authors

Natalia V. Andreyeva, Expert on New Educational Technologies in Blended Learning Center, IntelliJ Labs Co Ltd, Moscow, Russia, ORCID:, e-mail:



Total: 1493
Previous month: 36
Current month: 16


Total: 2424
Previous month: 27
Current month: 35