EPALE - Electronic Platform for Adult Learning in Europe

First published by Piotr Maczuga

Data from online courses and industry reports show that blended learning implementations do not always deliver the expected results. 

(c)  blended learning

Problems and challenges

In traditional self-paced (independent, on-demand) courses, very often only a handful of participants reach the end. For example, MOOC courses typically have a completion rate of less than 5% of registered participants. In comparison, courses conducted in a cohort model – where a group of participants work together under the guidance of an instructor – achieve completion rates of 70-80%. The key factor seems to be the presence of a person (tutor or mentor) and a mandatory schedule: participants have motivation and support, which is lacking in a loose, independent mode. 

In business practice, we are also seeing a decline in the amount of time devoted to learning. ATD data shows that the average employee received 32.9 hours of training in 2021, but by 2024 this had fallen to just 13.7 hours. Although training budgets are growing or at least remaining stable, companies are investing less and less time in training. Fewer hours mean that e-learning must be extremely effective – yet this is often not the case.

Finally, meta-analysis and scientific studies show that the average difference between blended learning and traditional learning is negligible. Müller and Mildenberger (2021) analysed more than a dozen-controlled studies and calculated a Hedges effect of g=0.0621 – statistically indistinguishable from zero. In other words, despite a reduction in face-to-face classes of as much as 30–79%, the educational outcomes were the same as in traditional lessons. Similarly, a large review published in Frontiers in Psychology (2023) found that in the US and China, blended learning does not significantly increase participant engagement compared to traditional methods. This is an uncomfortable truth: simply "dumping" some of the content onto the internet will not automatically improve results. The upside, however, is that it usually does not make them worse either. Moving some of the activity online can indeed relieve the burden on the educator or training provider, but care must be taken not to lose proven working models.

Digital or analogue?

That is why we should consciously choose which elements of the course to offer in digital form and which to keep in the traditional version. Both forms have their strengths:

• Digital – great for fast communication and remote collaboration, as online tools allow participants to work together in real time. E-learning platforms facilitate searching and accessing materials and keeping content up to date. What is more, digital courses are naturally accessible to people with mobility limitations (e.g., subtitles, automatic translations) and enable automatic progress tracking and reporting.
• Analogue (traditional) – excellent for initial concept acquisition and long-term memory building. Research shows that handwriting activates significantly more areas of the brain than simply clicking on a keyboard. Handwriting notes or drawings (dual coding) forces deep processing of information and the building of associations, which facilitates memorisation. Children learn letters and numbers faster when they could write them by hand – drawing letters on paper – than just pointing at them on a screen. Analogue techniques are also better for complex tasks that require concentration: by writing on paper or solving problems on a whiteboard, we avoid screen distractions and attention lapses.
• Blended learning – works best when it builds on existing knowledge and diverse learning styles. For example, we can first present the basics traditionally (to build a solid foundation of memory) and then use e-learning for practice and practical applications. Long-term programmes based on spaced repetition make excellent use of blended learning: participants learn concepts in the classroom and then regularly review and reinforce the material online at intervals, which reinforces learning. This approach also allows the pace and forms to be flexibly adapted to the needs of different learners.

Effective design – a neurobiological approach

Practice makes perfect – even blended learning requires thoughtful design to work effectively. A good starting point is the findings from research on the brain and memory. Dr Lila Davachi (NYU) and other researchers have developed the AGES model, which describes the four pillars of optimal learning:

• Attention – the participant must be as focused as possible on the content. In a world full of distractions, this means eliminating multitasking and unnecessary stimuli during learning. A good trainer can plan moments for focused work (e.g. short lectures, written assignments) before moving on to more open discussions or exercises.
• Generation – the learner independently creates knowledge based on new material. Instead of just passively reviewing content, they should actively process information: ask questions, paraphrase, illustrate with their own examples. This creates a "personal path" in the brain that connects current information with old information, which makes it much easier to recall later. At the course level, this means incorporating quizzes, mini-projects or discussions that force students to generate and use knowledge – even in the online part.
• Emotion – the material should evoke an emotional response. This does not mean just using strong feelings (e.g., fear) but making learning personal and attractive. Elements of storytelling, humour or linking content to real-life examples increase the involvement of the amygdala, which in turn enhances memory. Blended learning has an advantage here – for example, in the online phase, we can weave content into the context of the company or current cases, which are easier to "get into your head" than dry definitions.
• Spacing – learning spread out over time, with breaks and repetitions, is the key to lasting memory. Rare, intense sessions (so-called cramming) quickly disappear from memory. Instead, it is worth planning shorter online modules between face-to-face meetings. Instead, it is worth planning shorter online modules between face-to-face meetings. This allows participants to return to key concepts several times, and the brain gradually strengthens memory traces.

The AGES model reminds us that effective blended learning is not a matter of technology, but rather of designing a learning process in line with these principles. After all, technology is at our fingertips and is becoming increasingly accessible. We also have a plethora of newer AI platforms. If you don't know where and how to do your e-learning, start with Genially, and it is possible that you won't need anything else – not today, not tomorrow, not even in a year. 

Piotr Maczuga – writes, records, trains, and performs publicly, introducing the topic of new technologies in adult education. Daily, he produces educational content and digital events, and builds and modernises multimedia studios. Co-founder of the Digital Creators Foundation.