Challenges of Teaching Presence and SDL Scaffolding: A Systematic Literature Review on Dominant Pedagogical Barriers in Blended Learning Implementation in Higher Education

Authors

  • Nova Rina Sastra Inggris, Universitas Bung Hatta, Padang, Sumatera Barat, Indonesia
  • Willy Satria Sastra Inggris, Universitas Bung Hatta, Padang, Sumatera Barat, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24256/ideas.v13i2.8906

Keywords:

Instructional Design, Pedagogical Barriers, Scaffolding, Self-Directed Learning (SDL), Systematic Review, Teaching Presence

Abstract

This Systematic Literature Review (SLR) provides an in-depth analysis of pedagogical barriers in Blended Learning (BL) within higher education, specifically focusing on challenges related to Teaching Presence (TP) and the scaffolding of Self-Directed Learning (SDL). While previous reviews have largely focused on infrastructural constraints, there is a scarcity of synthesis regarding design-centric pedagogical barriers. A rigorous PRISMA-compliant SLR protocol was applied to 20 empirically-driven studies published between 2021–2023 across diverse disciplinary contexts. Data were extracted based on predefined criteria and analyzed using qualitative thematic synthesis. Pedagogical barriers were frequently reported (identified in 90% of studies). Key challenges clustered around: (1) Deficient TP in Course Design (failure to cohesively integrate online and face-to-face activities) and (2) Inadequate SDL Scaffolding (failure to provide explicit guidance for student self-monitoring). This synthesis posits that technical constraints are often secondary consequences of foundational pedagogical design flaws. The findings establish that a primary bottleneck in contemporary BL implementation is pedagogical, offering a foundation for institutions to prioritize faculty development in instructional design.

References

Bezliudna, V., Shcherban, I., Kolomiyets, O., Mykolaiko, V., & Bezliudnyi, R. (2021). Master Students’ Perceptions of Blended Learning in the Process of Studying English during COVID 19 Pandemic in Ukraine. Rupkatha Journal on Interdisciplinary Studies in Humanities. https://doi.org/10.21659/rupkatha.v13n4.54

Bosch, C., & Goede, R. (2019). Self-directed learning: A conceptual overview (E. Mentz (ed.); Vol. 1, pp. 1–36). AOSIS (Pty) Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4102/aosis.2019.BK134.01

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

Ilieva, G., Yankova, T., Klisarova-Belcheva, S., Dimitrov, A., Bratkov, M., & Angelov, D. (2023). Effects of Generative Chatbots in Higher Education. Information (Switzerland). https://doi.org/10.3390/info14090492

Martín-García, A. V. (2020). Blended Learning: Convergence between Technology and Pedagogy. In A. V. Martín-García (Ed.), Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems 126 (Vol. 126). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45781-5

Porter, W. W., Graham, C. R., Spring, K. A., & Welch, K. R. (2014). Blended learning in higher education: Institutional adoption and implementation. Computers & Education, 75, 185–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.02.011

Rasheed, R. A., Kamsin, A., & Abdullah, N. A. (2020). Challenges in the online component of blended learning: A systematic review. Computers and Education. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103701

Tong, D. H., Uyen, B. P., & Ngan, L. K. (2022). The effectiveness of blended learning on students’ academic achievement, self-study skills and learning attitudes: A quasi-experiment study in teaching the conventions for coordinates in the plane. Heliyon, 8(12), e12657. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e12657

Downloads

Published

2026-02-10

Citation Check