Views: 1,962
Arab World English Journal (AWEJ) Volume 16. Number 3, September 2025 Pp.211-226
Cross-platform resource fragmentation increases not only the cognitive load of students but also the workload of teachers. It is a problem that has long plagued teachers and students in blended teaching. In response to this problem, this study proposed a knowledge graph-driven integration framework. This framework first organized the core concepts of a course into a hierarchical knowledge graph, and then associated the corresponding micro-lectures, digital textbook segments, and virtual simulation exercises. On the basis of this framework, the research further constructed a knowledge graph-driven teaching model to solve the low efficiency of resource integration in blended teaching. A quasi-experimental study was conducted with 180 sophomores from six intact classes. The results showed that the final exam scores of the experimental group were higher (82.1 vs. 76.2, p < 0.001), their perception of resource coherence was stronger (4.0/5.0 vs. 3.2/5.0, p < 0.001), and their cognitive load was significantly lower (4.9/10 vs. 6.1/10, p < 0.001). Besides, the weekly workload of teachers decreased by 37.8%. These results demonstrated that the knowledge graph-driven teaching model can not only create a coherent learning environment for students, but also significantly improve students’ learning outcomes and teachers’ teaching efficiency. It is recommended that courses relying on cross-platform resources for blended teaching adopt this model. Future research could further test this model in different disciplines and over a longer period to see how it works in different scenarios.
Lou, L. (2025). From Fragmentation to Coherence: A Knowledge Graph-Driven Integration Framework for Blended Learning. Arab World English Journal, 16(3): 211-226
Abirami, A. M., Pudumalar, S., & Pandeeswari, S. T. (2023). Designing an effective teaching learning environment for an undergraduate software engineering course. International Journal of Adult Education and Technology, 14(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJAET.321655
Al Hajri, M., Bani Orabah, S., Domalaon, D., & Bijani, H. (2025). Evaluating the quality of blended learning in higher education: Teachers’ and students’ perceptions in an Omani EFL context. Arab World English Journal, Special Issue on CALL, (11), 20-42. https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/call11.2
Alharbi, W., & Basiouni, A. (2025). The impact of blended learning on EFL student satisfaction and retention: A customer satisfaction model approach. Arab World English Journal, 16(1), 179–206. https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol16no1.11
Aljuaid, H. (2024). The impact of artificial intelligence tools on academic writing instruction in higher education: A systematic review. Arab World English Journal (Special Issue on ChatGPT), 26-55. https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/ChatGPT.2
Alsalihi, H. D. A. (2025). The Effect of a Blended Approach in Enhancing Paraphrasing and Summarization Skills among EFL Female Students in Academic Writing. Arab World English Journal, Special Issue on CALL (11), 177-191. https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/call11.11
Balyshev, P., Darinskaia, L., Molodtsova, G., & Oskina, A. (2024). Organizing students’ online teamwork for sustainable development. International Journal of Online Pedagogy and Course Design, 14(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJOPCD.353300
Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Schmid, R. F., Tamim, R. M., & Abrami, P. C. (2014). A meta-analysis of blended learning and technology use in higher education: From the general to the applied. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 26(1), 87–122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-013-9077-3
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Chaiklin, S. (2003). The zone of proximal development in Vygotsky’s theory of learning and school instruction. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, 58(3), 1411.
Denbel, D. G. (2023). Challenges of Teaching and Learning Mathematics Courses on Online Platforms. International Journal of Online Pedagogy and Course Design, 13(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJOPCD.321155
Dörrenbächer-Ulrich, L., Sparfeldt, J. R., & Perels, F. (2024). Knowing how to learn: Development and validation of the strategy knowledge test for self-regulated learning (SKT-SRL) for college students. Metacognition and Learning, 19, 1–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-024-09379-w
EDUCAUSE. (2024). 2024 EDUCAUSE Horizon Report: Teaching and Learning Edition. EDUCAUSE.
Fan, J. (2024). A big data and neural networks-driven approach to designing a student management system. Soft Computing, 28(2), 1255–1276. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-023-09524-8
Fedorenko, S., & Kravchenko, T. (2023). Multimodal resources and students’ motivation in English for specific purposes. Arab World English Journal, 14(1), 59–70. https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol14no1.4
Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001
Graham, C. R. (2013). Emerging practice and research in blended learning. In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of distance education (3rd ed., pp. 333–350). Routledge.
Guo, Z., Guan, H., He, C., Xu, Y., & Liu, R. (2025). Knowledge graph-enhanced interleaved multi-head attention knowledge tracing. International Journal of Data Warehousing and Mining, 21(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJDWM.377619
Huang, R., Spector, J. M., & Yang, J. (2021). Educational technology: A primer for the 21st century (2nd ed.). Springer.
Ji, S., Pan, S., Cambria, E., Marttinen, P., & Philip, S. Y. (2021). A survey on knowledge graphs: Representation, acquisition, and applications. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, 33(2), 494–514. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNNLS.2021.3070843
Mayer, R. E. (2020). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (3rd ed., pp. 57–72). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108894333.008
Mir, N. A., Fathima, A., & Suppala, S. (2023). A new paradigm for blended learning: Leveraging inverted pedagogy and digital communication to foster effective learning. International Journal of Adult Education and Technology, 14(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJAET.321654
Ni, N., & He, Z. (2024). The application of blended learning in animation majors at colleges and universities in the era of “Internet +” International Journal of Web-Based Learning and Teaching Technologies, 19(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJWLTT.336835
OECD. (2023). OECD digital education outlook 2023: Towards an effective digital education ecosystem. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/c74f03de-en
Shaya, N., AbuKhait, R., Madani, R., & Ahmed, V. (2025). Conceptualizing blended learning models as a sustainable and inclusive educational approach. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 26(9), 90–111. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-03-2024-0167
Skulmowski, A., & Xu, K. (2022). Understanding cognitive load in digital and online learning: A new perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 34(1), 171-196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09624-7
Su, C., Jiang, Q., Han, Y., Wang, T., & He, Q. (2025). Knowledge graph-driven decision support for manufacturing process: A graph neural network-based knowledge reasoning approach. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 64, 103098. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2024.103098
Sweller, J. (2010). Element interactivity and intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 22(2), 123–138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9128-5
Tabassum, Z. A., & Mohd Saad, M. R. (2025). A decadal examination of community of inquiry and blended learning in EFL/ESL development: A systematic review. Arab World English Journal, 16(1), 179–206. https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol16no1.11
Tambunan, H., Silitonga, M., & Sidabutar, U. B. (2021). Blended learning in teaching technical teacher candidates with various types of learning styles. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, 13(3), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJMBL.2021070104
UNESCO. (2023). Global education monitoring report 2023: Technology in education: A tool on whose terms? UNESCO.
UNESCO. (2024). Global education monitoring report 2024: Education leadership. UNESCO.
Wang, H., & Li, A. (2021). A systematic approach for an English education model based on the neural network algorithm. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 40(2), 3455-3466. https://doi.org/10.3233/JIFS-189383
Wang, K., Chai, C. S., Liang, J. C., & Sang, G. (2024). Exploring teachers’ behavioural intentions to design artificial intelligence-assisted learning in Chinese K–12 education. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 33(5), 629–645. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2024.2369241
Wong, W., Chao, T., Chang, C., & Chen, K. (2019). Online scaffolding for data modeling in low-cost physical labs. International Journal of Distance Education Technologies, 17(4), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJDET.2019100101
Xiang, Y., Luo, Y., Ning, Z., Liu, Y., Yang, Z., Li, Z., et al. (2025). Construction method of multimodal knowledge graph for safety management in hydropower underground engineering. Journal of Tsinghua University (Science and Technology), 65(3), 433–445. https://doi.org/10.16511/j.cnki.qhdxxb.2025.26.014
Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education – where are the educators? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), 39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0
Lingling Lou is an associate professor at the School of English Studies at Zhejiang Yuexiu University. She has published over ten high-quality academic articles in peer-reviewed journals. Her research interests include foreign language teaching and intercultural communication. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0008-5190-0654