Online and blended learning can be more effective than traditional teaching, a Scottish study has found

Online and blended learning are “often more effective than traditional instruction”, an analysis of over 1,500 studies has found.

The review, which was carried out by researchers from the University of Dundee and a Glasgow-based psychologist, found that digital learning led to worse outcomes than classroom-based teaching in only two per cent of studies.

“This is clearly a major finding, indicating that digital technology is almost always superior to traditional instruction”, the authors said. However, they also warned that the approach to blended learning being considered by some council “would not work”. The back-up plan for primary schools, in case of future lockdowns, involves pupils being in two days a week on either a Monday and a Tuesday or a Thursday and a Friday, with Wednesday set aside for cleaning.

The review included 1,540 studies focusing on online and blended learning, as well as educational games, computer-supported cooperative learning (CSCL) and computer-assisted instruction (CAI).

Professor Keith Topping, who led the study, said blended learning was found to be most effective when pupils were required to work from home for “pretty small chunks” of time rather than “big slabs of half a week”.

He said: “Online and blended learning had very positive results; only two per cent of papers found that it was worse than traditional [entirely school-based] instruction.

“Working from home in the morning and going to school in the afternoon is the most sensible way of doing it because then the children can absorb the information in the morning and discussion and consolidation can take place in the afternoon.”

He added that the plans being proposed by some schools in the event of future lockdowns would not work.

“Two days is a long time for kids to be sitting at home, out of school, trying to absorb learning via videos and other online activities,” he said “They would not have the retention to have all that still in their heads when they came to school to discuss and consolidate it.”

He suggested blended or online learning in the morning and then school in the afternoon, to consolidate what had been studied.

The researchers undertook the review to ensure that any online and blended learning done during lockdown was not lost as schools returned to some form of normal working, and to support heads and teachers planning for future lockdowns.

Overall, 61% of studies found digital technology better than traditional instruction, while 7 per cent found it the same. Only two per cent found digital technology worse than traditional instruction. The outcome was unclear, or no conclusion was reached, in remaining studies.

Primary schools were found to have adapted best to digital learning. Researchers said this was “a very interesting outcome for this group, who might not have been expected to be highly responsive to digital technology”.

They found that a wide range of subjects were delivered using digital technology, including “writing, English as a foreign language, critical thinking, humanities, art and music, and health”.

Girls were found to have done better than boys at digital learning, and the positive effects were “more marked” for low ability students. Disadvantaged and rural students showed positive results “where access to digital technology is arranged”.

The review said: “For teachers, the message is that digital technology is not just for the average or above-average student in a normal educational situation.”

The review acknowledged, however, that one barrier to blended learning was “the child-minding function of school”.

It said: “While we have found that online and blended learning are effective, and often more effective than traditional instruction, both of them beg the question of degree of parental or other carer supervision at home.”