Quality Assessment of the Blended Learning in Higher Education Using the Modified HEdPERF Instrument

Dao Thanh Binh; Ngoc Tran Thi Bich; Nguyen Hoang Lan; Trinh Thu Thuy; Galina Barysheva; Lam Tran Si

doi:10.28991/ESJ-2025-SIED1-04

Authors

Dao Thanh Binh Hanoi University of Science and Technology, Hanoi, Viet Nam
Ngoc Tran Thi Bich
professor.tran.thibichngoc@gmail.com
Hanoi University of Science and Technology, Hanoi, Viet Nam
Nguyen Hoang Lan Hanoi University of Science and Technology, Hanoi, Viet Nam
Trinh Thu Thuy Hanoi University of Science and Technology, Hanoi, Viet Nam
Galina Barysheva Tomsk Polytechnic University, Tomsk, Russian Federation
Lam Tran Si Foreign Trade University, Hanoi, Viet Nam

Vol. 9 (2025): Special Issue "Emerging Trends, Challenges, and Innovative Practices in Education"

Special Issue "Emerging Trends, Challenges, and Innovative Practices in Education"

Downloads

PDF

Abstract
How to Cite
Metrics
References
License

The objective of this study is to introduce the HEdPERF instrument as a means to objectively assess the impact of various factors on the quality of blended learning, particularly focusing on student satisfaction. In the study, both quantitative and qualitative methods were utilized to analyze the results of the survey conducted online with 662 students and face-to-face interviews with 180 students from different faculties at Hanoi University of Science and Technology, covering students from their first to fifth years. The results show that factors including Academic and Non-Academic aspects, IT Facilities and Infrastructure, Access and Learning Organization, as well as the characteristics of the training major of the students and their academic year, impact the quality of blended learning, which requires a need to balance traditional in-person classroom instruction and online learning. The novelty of this study lies in the selection and modification of dimensions and items from Abdullah's HEdPERF instrument to evaluate factors affecting the quality of higher education services. This approach can be applied to assess various learning models or the quality of educational services offered by higher education institutions while considering the characteristics of different academic disciplines and the students' year of study.

Doi: 10.28991/ESJ-2025-SIED1-04

Full Text: PDF

Binh, D. T., Bich, N. T. T., Lan, N. H., Thuy, T. T., Barysheva, G., & Si, L. T. (2025). Quality Assessment of the Blended Learning in Higher Education Using the Modified HEdPERF Instrument. Emerging Science Journal, 9, 56–76. https://doi.org/10.28991/ESJ-2025-SIED1-04

Download Citation

Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95–105. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001.

Baquero, A., & Escortell, R. (2022). Blended Learning: a New Trend in Education. ICERI2022 Proceedings, 1, 4484–4491. doi:10.21125/iceri.2022.1080.

Cannaos, C., Onni, G., & Casu, A. (2024). Blended Learning: What Changes? Sustainability (Switzerland), 16(20), 8988. doi:10.3390/su16208988.

Watson, J. (2008). Blended Learning: The Convergence of Online and Face-to-Face Education. Promising Practices in Online Learning. North American Council for Online Learning, Virginia, United States.

C.E.C. (2021). Assessment of the Teaching and Learning Situation after Nearly a Month of Implementing the New School Year. Center for Educational Communication, Vietnamese Ministry of Education and Training, Hanoi, Vietnam.

Khuong, H. N. (2021). A Blended Learning Model in Higher Education and Practical Application in Universities. Vietnam Science and Education Journal, 45, 6–11.

Mai, N. T. (2023). Blended Learning in Universities – Learners' Evaluation. Industry and Trade Journal, 2, 94–99.

Cooney, M. H., Gupton, P., & O'Laughlin, M. (2000). Blurring the lines of play and work to create blended classroom learning experiences. Early Childhood Education Journal, 27(3), 165–171. doi:10.1007/BF02694230.

Osguthorpe, R., & Graham, C. (2003). Blended learning systems: Definitions and directions. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 4(3), 227–234.

Singh, H. (2021). Building Effective Blended Learning Programs. Advances in Educational Technologies and Instructional Design Book Series, 15–23. doi:10.4018/978-1-7998-7607-6.ch002.

Rababah, A., Nikitina, N. I., Grebennikova, V. M., Gardanova, Z. R., Zekiy, A. O., Ponkratov, V. V., Bashkirova, N. N., Kuznetsov, N. V., Volkova, T. I., Vasiljeva, M. V., Ivleva, M. I., & Elyakova, I. D. (2021). University social responsibility during the covid-19 pandemic: Universities' case in the brics countries. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(13), 7035. doi:10.3390/su13137035.

Allen, I. E., Seaman, J., & Garrett, R. (2007). Blending in: The extent and promise of blended education in the United States. Sloan Consortium. Newburyport, United States.

Cheng, X., Mo, W., & Duan, Y. (2023). Factors contributing to learning satisfaction with blended learning teaching mode among higher education students in China. Frontiers in Psychology, 14. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1193675.

Thapa, N., Lobo, D. J., & Pai, R. R. (2023). Perception, satisfaction, and self regulation in a blended learning environment during COVID 19 pandemic among health sciences students: A cross sectional survey. Journal of Education and Health Promotion, 12(1), 312. doi:10.4103/jehp.jehp_1739_22.

Hassan, E. A., Mohamed, A. M., Eltaib, F. A., & Khaled, A. M. S. (2024). Determinants of nursing students' satisfaction with blended learning. BMC Nursing, 23(1), 1-10. doi:10.1186/s12912-024-02393-y.

Jones, G. (2006). "I wish to register a complaint”: The growing complaints culture in higher education. Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education, 10(3), 69–73. doi:10.1080/13603100600816567.

Carlson, P. M., & Fleisher, M. S. (2002). Shifting realities in higher education: Today's business model threatens our academic excellence. International Journal of Public Administration, 25(9–10), 1097–1111. doi:10.1081/PAD-120006127.

Clayson, D. E., & Haley, D. A. (2005). Marketing Models in Education: Students as Customers, Products, or Partners. Marketing Education Review, 15(1), 1–10. doi:10.1080/10528008.2005.11488884.

Paricio Royo, J. (2017). Students as customers: a paradigm shift in higher education. Annual Review. Debats. Revista de Cultura, Poder i Societat, 2, 137–150. doi:10.28939/iam.debats-en.2017-10.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1985). A Conceptual Model of Service Quality and Its Implications for Future Research. Journal of Marketing, 49(4), 41–50. doi:10.1177/002224298504900403.

Berry, L. L., Parasuraman, A., & Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality. Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 12–40.

Cronin, J. J., & Taylor, S. A. (1992). Measuring Service Quality: A Reexamination and Extension. Journal of Marketing, 56(3), 55. doi:10.2307/1252296.

Lazčƒr (Staicu), M. (2022). Defining The Quality Education – An Extensive Bibliometric Analysis. Research and Education, 6(6), 118–132. doi:10.56177/red.6.2022.art.11.

UNICEF (2000). Defining Quality in Education. The International Working Group on Education Florence, Italy. Available online: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000199104 (accessed on April 2025).

Mitrofanova, S. Y., Vandysheva, L. V., & Pustarnakova, A. A. (2021). Students' satisfaction with the quality of educational services. SHS Web of Conferences, 122, 04004. doi:10.1051/shsconf/202112204004.

Pérez-Sullcaray, W., Sánchez-Solis, Y., Flores-Vilcapoma, L. R., & Muñoz-Rojas, J. K. (2023). Calidad de Servicios Educativos y Satisfacción de Estudiantes en Cursos Virtualizados de una Universidad Andina. Revista Docentes 2.0, 16(2), 5–14. doi:10.37843/rted.v16i2.352.

Pariseau, S. E., & Mcdaniel, J. R. (1997). Assessing service quality in schools of business. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 14(3), 204–218. doi:10.1108/02656719710165455.

O'Neill, M. (2003). The influence of time on student perceptions of service quality: The need for longitudinal measures. Journal of Educational Administration, 41(3), 310–324. doi:10.1108/09578230310474449.

Rolo, A., Alves, R., Saraiva, M., & Leandro, G. (2023). The SERVQUAL instrument to measure service quality in higher education – A case study. SHS Web of Conferences, 160, 01011. doi:10.1051/shsconf/202316001011.

Buttle, F. (1996). SERVQUAL: review, critique, research agenda. European Journal of Marketing, 30(1), 8–32. doi:10.1108/03090569610105762.

Cronin, J. J., & Taylor, S. A. (1994). SERVPERF versus SERVQUAL: Reconciling Performance-Based and Perceptions-Minus-Expectations Measurement of Service Quality. Journal of Marketing, 58(1), 125. doi:10.2307/1252256.

Özkan, A. H. (2016). Weaknesses of Servqual whıch Resources from Cognıtıve Dıfferences. International Journal of Business and Social Research, 6(11), 34. doi:10.18533/ijbsr.v6i11.1004.

Abdullah, F. (2006). Measuring service quality in higher education: HEdPERF versus SERVPERF. Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 24(1), 31–47. doi:10.1108/02634500610641543.

Adil, M., Falah, O., Al, M., & Albkour, A. M. (2013). SERVQUAL and SERVPERF: A Review of Measures in ServicesMarketing Research. Global Journal of Management and Business Research, 13(6), 65–76.

Fuchs, K., Fangpong, K., & Southam, A. (2022). The perceived service quality in higher education: An empirical study using the SERVPERF dimensions. Frontiers in Education, 7. doi:10.3389/feduc.2022.954797.

Karavasilis, G., Kyranakis, D., Paschaloudis, D., & Vrana, V. (2016). Measuring service quality in higher education: the Experience of Technological Education Institute of Central Macedonia, Greece. The Asian Conference on Education & International Development, 17–32.

Yorke, M. (1992). Quality in Higher Education: A Conceptualisation and Some Observations on the Implementation of a Sectoral Quality System. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 16(2), 90–104. doi:10.1080/0309877920160210.

Abdullah, F. (2006). The development of HEdPERF: A new measuring instrument of service quality for the higher education sector. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 30(6), 569–581. doi:10.1111/j.1470-6431.2005.00480.x.

Al Obeidi, A. S. (2021). The Impact of Academic and Non-academic Elements on Service Quality in Iraqi Higher Education. SSRN Electronic Journal, 1-11. doi:10.2139/ssrn.3771383.

Kalim, U., Tran, P. Q. B., Bibi, S., & Khamphouvong, L. (2022). Impact of Academic and Non-Academic Service Quality on International Students Satisfaction in Chinese Universities. Journal of Education and Learning, 11(6), 86. doi:10.5539/jel.v11n6p86.

Santinha, G., Sa, M. S., & Rosa, M. J. (2021). The Use of the Hedperf Evaluation Scale to Assess Service Quality in Higher Education Institutions: A Systematic Literature Review. Conference: XI Encontro de Investigadores da Qualidade, Universidade de Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal.

Silva, D. S., Moraes, G. H. S. M. de, Makiya, I. K., & Cesar, F. I. G. (2017). Measurement of perceived service quality in higher education institutions: A review of HEdPERF scale use. Quality Assurance in Education, 25(4), 415–439. doi:10.1108/QAE-10-2016-0058.

Pathania, A., & Kaur, P. (2021). Service Quality In Higher Education: A Literature Review. Psychology and Education, 58(3), 1665–1675. doi:10.17478/jegys.1518891.

Yazgın, Ö. (2024). Vocational and Technical Education: a Comprehensive Review. Istanbul Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 2(1), 1–17. doi:10.62185/issn.3023-5448.2.1.1.

Bouranta, N., Psomas, E. L., & Kafetzopoulos, D. (2024). Integrating online learning into service quality assessment in higher-education its influence on student satisfaction. TQM Journal, 1-45. doi:10.1108/TQM-06-2023-0180.

Banahene, S., Kraa, J. J., & Kasu, P. A. (2018). Impact of HEdPERF on Students' Satisfaction and Academic Performance in Ghanaian Universities; Mediating Role of Attitude towards Learning. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 06(05), 96–119. doi:10.4236/jss.2018.65009.

Panigrahi, R., Nihar, K. L., & Singh, N. (2024). Quality Measurement of the Blended Learning Model in Higher Education: Scale Development and Validation. Higher Learning Research Communications, 14(1), 86–102. doi:10.18870/hlrc.v14i1.1467.

Včƒn Viá»‡t, V. (2017). The evaluation of students' satisfaction with quality of educational services based on HEDPERF model. Journal of Science, Educational Science, 62(4), 11–23. doi:10.18173/2354-1075.2017-0053.

Quang, B. V., & Danh, B. V. (2020). Hedperf Research Model In Training Quality Assessment - Case Study: Ho Chi Minh City University of Industry. Journal of Science and Technology - IUH, 29(05). doi:10.46242/jst-iuh.v29i05.241.

Turysbayeva, A., Zhumabayeva, A., Yessenova, K., Bainazarova, T., & Maigeldiyeva, S. (2023). The impact of formative assessment techniques on students' self-assessment skills. Journal of Education and E-Learning Research, 10(4), 657–665. doi:10.20448/jeelr.v10i4.5045.

Tu, T. C., & Phuong, V. N. Factors affecting the effectiveness of online training at Nguyen Tat Thanh University. Journal of Education, 23(9), 311–317.

Thi Trang, N., Quoc Khanh, L., & Thi Hong, D. (2024). How Extra Tuition Affect Students Learning? Istanbul Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 2(1), 51–64. doi:10.62185/issn.3023-5448.2.1.5.

Cristobal, E., Flavián, C., & Guinalíu, M. (2007). Perceived e-service quality (PeSQ): Measurement validation and effects on consumer satisfaction and web site loyalty. Managing Service Quality, 17(3), 317–340. doi:10.1108/09604520710744326.

Kushkimbayeva, A., Tymbolova, A., Yessenova, K., Sultaniyazova, I., & Remetov, M. (2024). Increasing Students' Self-Esteem Based on the Pragmatic Level of Linguistic Personality. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 10(1), 72–80. doi:10.32601/ejal.10107.

Acceptance Rate:	21%
Review Speed:	74 days
Issue Per Year:	6
Number of Volumes:	7
Number of Issues:	44
Number of Articles:	493
Number of Reviewers:	1187
Number of Contributors:	1394
Contributing Countries:	83
No. of WoS Citations:	2609
No. of Scopus Citations:	2936
No. of Google Citations:	4161
Google h-index:	29
Google i10-index:	126
Abstract Views:	681,807
PDF Download:	492,524

Quality Assessment of the Blended Learning in Higher Education Using the Modified HEdPERF Instrument

Authors

Downloads

Downloads

Login

submission

Publisher & Affiliated Societies

Indexing & Abstracting

SidebarMenu

IndexedBy

Indexing and Abstracting

twitter

Social Media

Analytics

Analytics

Information

Most Cited Articles

Thermal Regeneration and Reuse of Carbon and Glass Fibers from Waste Composites

Impediments of Green Finance Adoption System: Linking Economy and Environment

Digital Transformation: Opportunities and Challenges for Leaders in the Emerging Countries in Response to Covid-19 Pandemic

Optical and Structural Characterization of Bi2FexNbO7 Nanoparticles for Environmental Applications

Address

Contact Info:

Quality Assessment of the Blended Learning in Higher Education Using the Modified HEdPERF Instrument

Authors

Downloads

Downloads

Login

submission

Publisher & Affiliated Societies

Indexing & Abstracting

SidebarMenu

social

Journal Imprint

Journal Metrics

IndexedBy

Indexing and Abstracting

twitter

Social Media

Analytics

Analytics

Information

Most Cited Articles

Thermal Regeneration and Reuse of Carbon and Glass Fibers from Waste Composites

Impediments of Green Finance Adoption System: Linking Economy and Environment

Digital Transformation: Opportunities and Challenges for Leaders in the Emerging Countries in Response to Covid-19 Pandemic

Optical and Structural Characterization of Bi2FexNbO7 Nanoparticles for Environmental Applications