Investigating the efficacy of blended learning in ESL classrooms

Figures & data

Table 1. Demographic breakdown

		Frequency	Percent
Gender	Female	161	32.3
	Male	338	67.7
Previous Education	Cambridge	75	15.0
System	Matriculation	424	85.0
Age	18–25	493	98.8
	25 and above	6	1.2
	Total	499	100.0

Table 2. Paired sample t-test

	t	Sig. (2-tailed)
Pair 1	−7.329	0.0

Figure 1. Measurement Model

Table 3. Reliability and Convergent Validity

Constructs	Items	Loadings	Alpha	CR	AVE
	EAC1	0.843
Easy Access To Computer (EAC)			0.701	0.868	0.768
	EAC2	0.908
	CL1	0.84
Computer Literacy (CL)	CL2	0.804	0.814	0.889	0.727
	CL3	0.911
	LL1	0.935
Language Learning (LL)			0.848	0.929	0.868
	LL2	0.929
	F2F1	0.75
Face-to-Face Interaction (F2F)	F2F2	0.907	0.777	0.866	0.684
	F2F3	0.818
	PBLM1	0.891
Pre-Built Learning Mechanism (PBLM)	PBLM2	0.918	0.875	0.923	0.8
	PBLM3	0.875
	R1	0.774
Resistance to Change (R)			0.714	0.832	0.714
	R2	0.911
	SA1	0.924
Student Assistance (SA)	SA2	0.918	0.918	0.948	0.859
	SA3	0.938
	TI1	0.828
Technical Issues (TI)	TI2	0.872	0.844	0.902	0.755
	TI3	0.905

Table 4. Fornell & Larcker Criterion

	EAC	CL	LL	F2F	PBLM	R	SA	TI
EAC	0.876
CL	0.333	0.853
LL	0.563	0.44	0.932
F2F	0.239	0.308	0.267	0.827
PBLM	0.451	0.252	0.609	0.039	0.895
R	0.11	0.157	0.154	0.112	0.036	0.845
SA	0.286	0.37	0.286	0.341	0.229	0.082	0.927
TI	0.256	0.701	0.334	0.337	0.231	0.077	0.461	0.869

Note: Note: EAC = Easy Access to Computer, CL = Computer Literacy, F2F = Face-to-Face, PBLM = Pre-built Learning Mechanism, RC = Resistance to Change, SA = Student Assistance, TI = Technical Issue, LL = Language Learning.

Table 5. HTMT Ratio

	EAC	CL	LL	F2F	PBLM	R	SAL	TI
EAC
CL	0.439
LL	0.72	0.522
F2F	0.305	0.37	0.31
PBLM	0.571	0.302	0.701	0.089
R	0.168	0.219	0.206	0.161	0.097
SA	0.345	0.424	0.32	0.41	0.254	0.101
TI	0.314	0.823	0.372	0.383	0.274	0.085	0.526

Note: EAC = Easy Access to Computer, CL = Computer Literacy, F2F = Face-to-Face, PBLM = Prebuilt Learning Mechanism, RC = Resistance to Change, SA = Student Assistance, TI = Technical Issue, LL = Language Learning.

Table 6. Path Analysis

Hypothesis	Coefficient	T Statistics	P Values	Decision
EAC ->LL	0.266	6.506	0.000	Supported
CL -> LL	0.219	4.667	0.000	Supported
F2F->LL	0.127	3.463	0.001	Supported
PBLM-> LL	0.434	10.55	0.000	Supported
R->LL	0.066	2.095	0.037	Supported
SA -> LL	−0.005	0.089	0.929	Unsupported
TI -> LL	−0.031	0.645	0.519	Unsupported

Note: EAC = Easy Access to Computer, CL = Computer Literacy, F2F = Face-to-Face, PBLM = Pre-built Learning Mechanism, RC = Resistance to Change, SA = Student Assistance, TI = Technical Issue, LL = Language Learning.