The present study adopted a descriptive survey method for collecting data. The sample was selected by simple random technique. The total sample consisted of 169 in-service school teachers teaching at pre-primary, primary and secondary sections from all over India. Data was collected by circulating google forms in order to collect data during COVID 19 pandemic. Out of the total in-service school teachers 145 were females and 24 were males and 148 were from urban area and 21were from rural area. The questionnaire for the present study was adapted from Birbal et al. (2018) study on learners’ readiness for blended learning. The instrument consisted of 34 items that measured learners' attitudes towards six different aspects of blended learning: learning flexibility (4 items); online learning (8 items); study management (6 items); technology (4 items); classroom learning (5 items) and online interaction (7 items). Relevant descriptive and inferential analysis was done using IBM Statistical Package for Social Scientists (SPSS-26) for hypothesis testing. The table 1 below represents the sample size of the study based on gender and location of educational institutes.
Table 1 Sample Size for the Present Study
|
|
N
|
Total
|
Percentage (%)
|
Gender
|
Male
|
145
|
169
|
85.80
|
Female
|
24
|
14.20
|
Location of institute
|
Urban
|
148
|
169
|
87.57
|
Rural
|
21
|
12.43
|
The above figure 1 represents the pie chart of sample size of in-service school teachers based on gender. Out of 169 teachers 85.80% were Female teachers and 14.20% were Male teachers.
The above figure 2 represents the pie chart of sample size of in-service school teachers based on location of educational institutes. Out of 169 teachers 87.57% teach in educational institutes located in Urban areas and 12.43% teach in educational institutes located in Rural areas.
HYPOTHESIS TESTING AND INTERPRETATION:
t test was used for testing the null hypothesis using IBM SPSS software (26). The following null hypothesis were framed for the present study:
Hypothesis 1: There is no significant difference in the attitude of male and female in-service school teachers towards blended learning and following six factors affecting it:
- learning flexibility
- online learning
- study management
- technology
- classroom
- online interaction
Table 2 represents the Attitude of Male and Female In-Service School Teachers towards Blended Learning and its Dimensions
Table 2 Attitude of Male and Female In-Service School Teachers towards Blended Learning and its Dimensions
|
Gender
|
Mean
|
t value
|
Sig. (2-tailed)
|
BL
|
Female
|
125.5517
|
1.545
|
.124
|
Male
|
133.5833
|
F1
|
Female
|
14.8069
|
.416
|
.678
|
Male
|
14.4583
|
F2
|
Female
|
27.5379
|
2.666
|
.008*
|
Male
|
30.8750
|
F3
|
Female
|
19.3172
|
2.601
|
.010*
|
Male
|
21.6667
|
F4
|
Female
|
14.5793
|
1.086
|
.279
|
Male
|
15.4583
|
F5
|
Female
|
18.9310
|
.149
|
.882
|
Male
|
19.0833
|
F6
|
Female
|
30.3793
|
1.140
|
.256
|
Male
|
32.0417
|
(BL= Blended Learning, F1= Learning Flexibility, F2= Online Learning, F3= Study Management, F4= Technology, F5= Classroom Learning and F6= Online Interaction)
The t value for attitude of male and female in-service school teachers towards blended learning was found to be 1.54 and p value was found to be .124 which is not significant at 0.05 level and 0.01 level. Therefore, the null hypothesis is accepted for BL.
The t value for attitude of male and female in-service school teachers towards Learning Flexibility, Technology, Classroom Learning and Online Interaction was found to be .416, 1.086, .149 and 1.140 respectively and the p value was found to be .678, .279, .882 and .256 respectively which is not significant at 0.05 level and 0.01 level. Therefore, the null hypothesis is accepted for the above dimensions of blended learning.
The t value for attitude of male and female in-service school teachers towards Online Learning and Study Management was found to be 2.666 and 2.601 respectively and p value was found to be 0.008 and 0.010 respectively which is significant at 0.01 level. Therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected as far as the above two dimensions of blended learning are considered. The mean value for female in-service teachers towards online learning was 27.5379 and for males it was 30.8750. The mean value for female in-service teachers towards study management was 19.3172 and for males it was 21.6667. The mean score for male in-service teachers is greater than that of female in-service teachers with respect to online learning and study management. This indicates that male in-service school teachers have a higher attitude towards online learning and study management as compared to female teachers.
Hypothesis 2: There is no significant difference in the attitude of in-service school teachers teaching in educational institutes located in Urban and Rural areas towards blended learning and following six factors affecting it:
- learning flexibility
- online learning
- study management
- technology
- classroom
- online interaction
Table 3 represents the Attitude of In-Service School Teachers from Urban and Rural areas towards Blended Learning and its Dimensions
Table 3 Attitude of In-Service School Teachers from Urban and Rural areas towards Blended Learning and its Dimensions
|
Location of Educational Institute
|
Mean
|
t value
|
Sig. (2-tailed)
|
BL
|
Rural
|
12.4286
|
2.052
|
.042*
|
Urban
|
15.0878
|
F1
|
Rural
|
27.6667
|
3.082
|
.002*
|
Urban
|
28.0608
|
F2
|
Rural
|
18.2381
|
. 291
|
.771
|
Urban
|
19.8514
|
F3
|
Rural
|
13.0952
|
1.668
|
.097
|
Urban
|
14.9324
|
F4
|
Rural
|
17.5238
|
2.167
|
.032*
|
Urban
|
19.1554
|
F5
|
Rural
|
27.9048
|
1.517
|
.131
|
Urban
|
31.0000
|
F6
|
Rural
|
116.8571
|
2.022
|
.045*
|
Urban
|
128.0878
|
(BL= Blended Learning, F1= Learning Flexibility, F2= Online Learning, F3= Study Management, F4= Technology, F5= Classroom Learning and F6= Online Interaction)
The t value for attitude of in-service school teachers teaching in educational institutes located in urban and rural area towards blended learning was found to be 2.052 and p value was found to be 0.042 which is significant at 0.05 level. Therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected for BL. The mean value for in-service school teachers teaching in educational institutes located in urban area was 15.0878 and rural area was 12.428. The mean value for in-service teachers teaching in urban area is greater than that of those teaching in rural areas. In other words, in-service teachers teaching in urban areas have much more positive attitude towards blended learning as compared to in-service teachers teaching in rural areas.
The t value for attitude of in-service school teachers teaching in educational institutes located in urban and rural area towards Learning Flexibility, Technology and Online Interaction was found to be 3.082, 2.167 and 2.022 respectively and p value was found to be .002, 0.032 and .045 respectively which is significant at 0.01 level and 0.05 level. Therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected for Learning Flexibility, Technology and Online Interaction. The mean value for in-service school teachers teaching in educational institutes located in urban area towards Learning Flexibility was 28.0608 and rural area was 27.6667. The mean value for in-service school teachers teaching in educational institutes located in urban area towards Technology was 19.1554 and rural area was 17.5238. The mean value for in-service school teachers teaching in educational institutes located in urban area towards Online Interaction was 128.0878 and rural area was 116.8571. The mean value for in-service teachers teaching in urban area is greater than that of those teaching in rural areas as far as Learning Flexibility, Technology and Online Interaction were considered. In other words, in-service teachers teaching in urban areas have much more positive attitude towards Learning Flexibility, Technology and Online Interaction as compared to in-service teachers teaching in rural areas.
The t value for attitude of in-service school teachers teaching in educational institutes located in urban and rural area towards Online Learning, Study Management and Class-Room Learning was found to be .291, 1.668 and 1.517 respectively and the p value was found to be .771, .097 and 0.131 respectively which is not significant at 0.05 level and 0.01 level. Therefore, null hypothesis is accepted. There is no significant difference in the attitude of in-service school teachers teaching in educational institutes located in Urban and Rural areas towards Online Learning, Study Management and Class-Room Learning.