Home⇛International Journal of Multidisciplinary Educational Research and Innovation⇛vol. 3 no. 3 (2025)

Assessing Student Learning and Satisfaction in Limited Face-to-Face Class through Mixed Method Approach: Local College in Context

Jaya C. Madrio | Jonelson C. Escandallo

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

This study aimed to assess the learning and satisfaction of students despite minimal face to-face classes at Kapalong College of Agriculture, Sciences, and Technology (KCAST), a local higher education institution in a rural town in Davao del Norte, Philippines. The study counted the strengths and weaknesses of students despite post-pandemic transition learning. With a convergent parallel design mixed-methods research design, the study obtained quantitative and qualitative data. Quantitative data were collected through responses to structured questionnaires from the 185 English major students of all year levels, and qualitative data were collected from 14 students purposively selected: 7 for in depth interviews and 7 for focused group discussions. Data from both strands were separately analyzed and then synthesized for holistic interpretation. Findings showed high student satisfaction with the minimal face-to-face learning modality. Contributing to this were culturally responsive pedagogical practices, active participation, and enhanced understanding through direct interaction with the instructors. Students also showed increased motivation and academic performance. Students, however, reported difficulty in adjusting to the hybrid modality, time management, and provision of adequate learning resources concerns relevant to rural institutional contexts such as KCAST. Despite these, students perceived the value of collaborative in-person interaction in reinforcing learning. The study points out the value of structured, in-person interaction in enhancing educational outcomes since it highlights the value of flexible, inclusive, and context-sensitive pedagogy. The findings offer insights to rural higher education institutions to further enhance hybrid learning systems by integrating digital tools, sustaining constant academic and technological support, and empowering faculty members with blended instruction. Continuous evaluation of student needs is one of the key ingredients to increase the quality and responsiveness of post-pandemic education of community-based colleges such as KCAST.



References:

  1. Abad, D. J. V., & Abad, E. M. (2024). Challenges and coping strategies of students during educational disruptions: Designing resilient learning plans. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Analysis, 7(7). https://doi.org/10.47191/ijmra/v7-i07-71
  2. Aguirre, J., del Carmen, M., & Bautista, R. (2022). Student satisfaction in limited face-to-face learning in Philippine higher education. Journal of Learning and Teaching, 18(2), 45–57. https://doi.org/10.54476/iimrj18
  3. Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2020). Digital learning compass: Distance education enrollment report 2020. Babson Survey Research Group. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED580868.pdf
  4. Almusharraf, N., & Khahro, S. (2020). Students’ satisfaction with online learning experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 15(21), 246–267. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i21.15647
  5. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice-Hall. https://doi.org/10.1177/105960117700200317
  6. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2013). Successful qualitative research: A practical guide for beginners. SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959353515614115
  7. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674028845
  8. Carroll, J. B. (1963). A model of school learning. Teachers College Record, 64(8), 723–733. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146816306400801
  9. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
  10. Eom, S. B., Wen, H. J., & Ashill, N. (2006). The determinants of students’ perceived learning outcomes and satisfaction in university online education: An empirical investigation. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 4(2), 215–235. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4609.2006.00114.x
  11. Escandallo, J. C., & Baradillo, K. D. (2024). Enhancing English speaking skills of education students through hybrid instruction. International Journal of Language Education and Pedagogy, 5(1), 22–34. https://doi.org/10.36713/epra15397
  12. Escandallo, J. C., & Escandallo, M. C. (2024). Student satisfaction and academic performance in blended learning environments: A local college study. Philippine Journal of Education and Development, 9(1), 77–89. [Insert journal URL]
  13. Ferri, F., Grifoni, P., & Guzzo, T. (2020). Online learning and emergency remote teaching: Opportunities and challenges in the COVID-19 crisis. Societies, 10(4), 86. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc10040086
  14. Giles, H. (1973). Accent mobility: A model and some data. Anthropological Linguistics, 15(2), 87–105.
  15. Harding, J. (2013). Qualitative data analysis from start to finish. SAGE Publications.
  16. Kang, J., Zhang, Y., & Wang, L. (2022). The impact of emergency remote teaching on Chinese students’ learning during COVID-19. International Journal of Distance Education Technologies, 20(1), 20–32. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJDET.2022010102
  17. Kearsley, G., & Shneiderman, B. (1998). Engagement theory: A framework for technology-based teaching and learning. Educational Technology, 38(5), 20–23. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44428478
  18. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice-Hall.
  19. Korhonen, V., Mattsson, M., Inkinen, M., & Hailikari, T. (2019). Understanding the multidimensional nature of student engagement during the first year of higher education. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1056. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01056
  20. Kuper, A., Lingard, L., & Levinson, W. (2008). Critically appraising qualitative research. BMJ, 337, a1035. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.a1035
  21. Kush, J. M., Badillo Goicoechea, E., Musci, R. J., & Stuart, E. A. (2022). Teacher mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic. Educational Researcher. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X221134281
  22. Paul, R., & Pradhan, S. (2019). Achieving student satisfaction and student loyalty in higher education: A focus on service value dimensions. Services Marketing Quarterly, 40(3), 245–268. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332969.2019.1630177
  23. Prasad, D. (2022). Higher education transitions during COVID-19: A review of challenges and practices. Asian Education Review, 11(1), 1–14.
  24. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Plenum. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7
  25. Spady, W. G. (1994). Outcome-based education: Critical issues and answers. American Association of School Administrators. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED380910.pdf
  26. Studyportals. (2019). Global student satisfaction 2019. https://studyportals.com/intelligence/global-student-satisfaction-2019/
  27. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvjf9vz4
  28. Westphal, A., Kalinowski, E., Hoferichter, C. J., & Vock, M. (2022). K–12 teachers’ stress and burnout during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 920326. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.920326
  29. Whelan Ariza, E. N. (2018). Not for ESOL teachers: What every classroom teacher needs to know about the linguistically, culturally, and ethnically diverse student. Pearson.
  30. Wu, Z. (2020). How a top Chinese university is responding to coronavirus. World Economic Forum. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/03/coronavirus-china-the-challenges-of-online-learning-for-universities/
  31. Xu, D., & Xue, Y. (2023). Students’ satisfaction and academic performance in hybrid learning environments. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 51(1), 34–56. https://doi.org/10.1177/00472395211056789
  32. Zimmerman, B. J. (1989). A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(3), 329–339. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.81.3.329

Tools


Copyright © 2026  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic