CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 226Online and Blended LearningEducational Leadership and InnovationEducational Technology in Learning

Innovative pedagogical principles and technological tools capabilities for immersive blended learning: a systematic literature review

Open access
Bizami, Najwa Amanina, Tasir, Zaidatun, Kew, Si Na·2023·Education and Information Technologies
DOI 10.1007/s10639-022-11243-wPMC PMC9334534
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Blended learning is widely known for its ability to improve learning, nevertheless little is still known about the best ways of designing effective blended learning environment which can support immersive learning such as greater learning experience and accessibility to education. In this respect, this study investigates the mapping of the principles of three Education 4.0 innovative pedagogies, namely, heutagogy, peeragogy, and cybergogy, with the capabilities of three technological learning tools, that is, Facebook (FB), Learning Management System (LMS), and Blog, via a systematic literature review technique. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used as the methodology, and the literature was further selected using Gough's Weight of Evidence criteria, resulting in 59 studies. The results show that cognitive factor is the most linked pedagogical principle to the four main capabilities of technological learning tools, that is, time, self-related, learning task, and learning community-related. This mapping is useful for instructors to plan learning and teaching by choosing the technological learning tools that match with appropriate Education 4.0 pedagogies for optimising the immersive blended learning practices.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10639-022-11243-w

Cites

122 of 122 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Systematic reviews of technology-enhanced and immersive learning environments have noted that existing research tends to emphasize technological features and pedagogical innovations while offering limited insight into the psychological mechanisms that shape learners' engagement, regulation, and deep learning processes.

    “Complementing these findings, systematic reviews of technology-enhanced and immersive learning environments have noted that existing research tends to emphasize technological features and pedagogical innovations while offering limited insight into the psychological mechanisms that shape learners' engagement, regulation, and deep learning processes (Bizami et al., 2023).”

    From Cognitive offloading through digital tools and its relationship with critical thinking, task persistence, and learning depth (2026) · cites this paper as Bizami et al., 2023

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 14

  1. Azizan, F. Z. (2010). Blended learning in higher education institution in Malaysia. In Proceedings of regional conference on knowledge integration in ICT (pp. 454–466). Retrieved December 1, 2020, from http://library.oum.edu.my/oumlib/sites/default/files/file_attachments/odl-resources/4334/blended-learning.pdf
  2. Azmi HM Zeehan S Fahad S Maryam F Hisham A Assessment of students’ perceptions towards e-learning management system (E-LMS) in a Malaysian pharmacy school: A descriptive study Malaysian Journal of Public Health Medicine 2012 12 1 14 20
  3. Cavus, N., Uzunboylu, H., & Ibrahim, D. (2006). The effectiveness of using learning management systems and collaborative tools in web-based teaching of programming languages [Paper presentation]. 3rd International Symposium and Education on Electrical, Electronic, and Computer Engineering (ISEECE), Near East University. Retrieved December 2, 2020, https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED503541.pdf
  4. Ciolan, L., Iftimescu, S., & Stingu, M. (2021). The institutional conditions of adapting to future challenges in the Romanian education system. Working Paper. CEU Center for Policy Studies. Retrieved December 23, 2020, https://cps.ceu.edu/sites/cps.ceu.edu/files/attachment/publication/3312/cps-working-paper-educ-institutional-conditions-romania-2021-corr.pdf
  5. Corneli, J., & Danoff, C. J. (2011). Paragogy. In Proceedings of the 6th Open Knowledge Conference, OKCon 2011, Berlin, Germany. Retrieved November 10, 2020, http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-739/paper_5.pdf
  6. Corneli, J., Danoff, C. J., Pierce, C., Ricaurte, P., & MacDonald, L. S. (2015). Patterns of peeragogy. In Proceedings of the 22nd Conference on Pattern Languages of Programs (pp. 1–23). Retrieved from December 1, 2020, https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.5555/3124497.3124531 · DOI
  7. Gregory, S., Bannister-Tyrrell, M., Charteris, J., & Nye, A. (2018). Heutagogy in postgraduate education: Cognitive advantages for higher degree online students. In F. F. Padro, R. Erwee, M. A. Harmes, M. K. Harmes, & P. A. Danaher (Eds.), Postgraduate Education in Higher Education, (pp. 189–209). Springer. 10.1186/s41039-017-0059-3 · DOI
  8. Hase, S. (2016). Self-determined learning (heutagogy): Where have we come since 2000? Southern Institute of Technology Journal of Applied Research, 1–20. Retrieved December 2, 2020, https://sit.ac.nz/Portals/0/upload/documents/sitjar/Heutagogy%20-%20One.pdf
  9. Hrastinski S Asynchronous and synchronous e-learning Educause Quarterly 2008 31 4 51 55
  10. Patel JV Paradigm shift-pedagogy to andragogy to heutagogy in higher education Weekly Journal of Higher Education by Association of Indian Universities 2018 56 30 1 5
  11. Sobchenko T Choice of blended learning models for higher pedagogical education students Physical and Mathematical Education 2021 2 28 17 21 10.31110/2413-1571-2021-028-2-003UDC371.315.7 · DOI
  12. Sumarsono S The paradigms of heutagogy and cybergogy in the transdisciplinary perspective Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pengajaran 2019 52 3 172 182 10.23887/jpp.v52i3.22882 · DOI
  13. Sulcic, V. (2008). Blogging in tertiary education. IADIS International Conference WWW/Internet 2008
  14. Tajudin NAM Suhaimi NA Adnan M Puteh M Synergizing mathematical learning at higher institution through heutagogical approach Universal Journal of Educational Research 2020 8 6 2646 2653 10.13189/ujer.2020.08064 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Bizami, N. A., Tasir, Z., & Kew, S. N.
Affiliations
University of Technology Malaysia (MY)
Corresponding author
Tasir, Zaidatun
ORCID
Venue
Education and Information Technologies
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2022-07-29
Volume
28
Issue
2
Pages
1373-1425
ISSN
  • 1360-2357 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-7608
DOI
10.1007/s10639-022-11243-w
PMC
PMC9334534
OpenAlex
W4288425308
Cited by
226
References
122
Citations by year
2026: 36 · 2025: 71 · 2024: 74 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 9
FWCI
11.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Education and Information Technologies (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia (FRGS/1/2020/SSI0/UTM/01/1)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
  • Social Sciences › Education › Educational Leadership and Innovation
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Educational Technology in Learning
Keywords
Education 4.0, heutagogy, cybergogy, virtual learning environments, Facebook in education, blogs, teaching principles, learning communities, self-directed learning

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review