A descriptive survey was adopted for the present action research in order to study the perception of in-service school teachers towards adopting a blended learning approach during the current crisis. The tool for online learning was adopted from Aladwan et al. , 2018. The statements in the questionnaire were divided into the following three categories: item 1-12 for determining student attitudes toward blended instruction; item 13-24 to determine the negative attitudes and impressions of students from blended learning; item 25-36 - related to the definition of students' understanding and ideas about mixed learning.
The available sample of 62 in-service school teachers was selected and data was collected through google forms due to the ongoing pandemic. The sample consists of 20 in-service primary school teachers and 42 in-service secondary school teachers. Table 1.1 below represents the sample size of the present study.
Table 1.1: Sample Size of the Present Studies
Number of In-Service teachers
|
Percentage (%)
|
In-Service School Teachers
|
62
|
100
|
Primary In-Service School Teachers
|
20
|
32.3
|
Secondary In-Service School Teachers
|
42
|
67.7
|
Figure 1.1 is a pie chart representing the sample size for present study in percentage. Out of total In-Service School Teachers 32.3% are In-Service School Teachers teaching in Primary section and 67.7% are In-Service School Teachers teaching in Secondary section.
HYPOTHESIS TESTING AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
Hypothesis 1: There is no significant difference in the perception of In-Service School Teachers towards adopting a blended learning approach during the current crisis.
Table 1.2 Relevant Descriptive Statistics for Testing Hypothesis 1
|
N
|
Mean
|
Median
|
Mode
|
SD
|
Skewness
|
Kurtosis
|
In-Service School Teachers
|
62
|
23
|
23
|
26
|
5.15
|
-0.57
|
-0.01
|
Primary In-Service School Teachers
|
20
|
22.8
|
26
|
26
|
6.98
|
-1.58
|
2.32
|
Secondary In-Service School Teachers
|
42
|
23.02
|
22.5
|
26
|
4.61
|
-0.01
|
-0.62
|
The Mean value for In-Service School Teachers was found to be 23, Median was found to be 23, Mode was found to be 26 and the Standard Deviation was found to be 5.15. The distribution is negatively skewed. The skewness is found to be -0.57. The Kurtosis is found to be -0.01 which is negative. Hence distribution is platykurtic.
The Mean value for Primary In-Service School Teachers was found to be 22.8, Median was found to be 26, Mode was found to be 26 and the Standard Deviation was found to be 6.98. The distribution is negatively skewed. The skewness is found to be -1.58. The kurtosis is found to be 2.32 which is positive. Hence distribution is leptokurtic.
The Mean Value for Secondary In-Service School Teachers was found to be 23.02, Median found to be 22.5, Mode found to be 26 and the Standard Deviation was found to be 4.61. The distribution is negatively skewed. The skewness is found to be -0.01. The kurtosis is found to be -0.62 which is negative. Hence distribution is platykurtic.
Hypothesis 2: There is no significant difference in the perception of primary and secondary In-Service school teachers towards adopting a Blended learning approach during the current crisis.
Table 1.3: Inferential Analysis of Data for Testing Hypothesis 2
Group
|
N
|
Mean
|
t Value
|
p Value
|
LoS
|
Primary In-Service School Teachers
|
20
|
22.8
|
0.15
|
0.88
|
NS
|
Secondary In-Service School Teachers
|
42
|
23.02
|
The above table shows the relevant inferential data that were used to test hypothesis 2.
The t value for perception of Primary and Secondary In-Service School Teachers towards Blended Learning was found to be 0.15. p value was found to be 0.88 which is greater than 0.05, Hence, it is not significant. Therefore, the null hypothesis is accepted. There is no significant difference in the perception of primary and secondary in-service school teachers towards adopting a Blended learning approach during the current crisis
Hypothesis 3: There is no significant difference in the perception of Primary and Secondary In-Service School Teachers towards adopting only Blended Learning.
Table 1.4: Inferential Analysis of Data for Testing Hypothesis 3
Group
|
N
|
Mean
|
t Value
|
p Value
|
LoS
|
Primary In-Service School Teachers
|
20
|
14.83
|
0.01
|
0.99
|
NS
|
Secondary In-Service School Teachers
|
42
|
14.85
|
The above table shows the relevant inferential data that were used to test hypothesis 3.
The t value for perception of Primary and Secondary In-Service School Teachers towards only Blended Learning was found to be found to be 0.01. p value was found to be 0.99 which is greater than 0.05, hence it is not significant. Therefore, the null hypothesis is accepted. There is no significant difference in the perception of Primary and Secondary In-Service School Teachers towards adopting only Blended Learning.
Hypothesis 4: There is no significant difference in the perception of Primary and Secondary In-Service School Teachers towards understanding the need of Blended Learning.
Table 1.5: Inferential Analysis of Data for Testing Hypothesis 4
Group
|
N
|
Mean
|
t Value
|
p Value
|
LoS
|
Primary In-Service School Teachers
|
20
|
8.11
|
0.26
|
0.79
|
NS
|
Secondary In-Service School Teachers
|
42
|
8.25
|
The above table shows the relevant inferential data that were used to test hypothesis 4.
The t value for perception of Primary and Secondary In-Service School Teachers towards understanding the need of Blended Learning was found to be found to be 0.26. p value was found to be 0.79 which is greater than 0.05, hence it is not significant. Therefore, the null hypothesis is accepted. There is no significant difference in the perception of Primary and Secondary In-Service School Teachers towards understanding the need of Blended Learning.