Have a personal or library account? Click to login

Transactional Distance and Interaction in Hybrid Education: a Case Study

European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning
Volume 27 (2025): Issue 1 (January 2025)
By:
Open Access
|Feb 2025

Figures & Tables

Figure 1.

Summary of how the three variables: dialogue, structure and autonomy affect the transactional distance. For example, more dialogue results in a lower transactional distance.
Summary of how the three variables: dialogue, structure and autonomy affect the transactional distance. For example, more dialogue results in a lower transactional distance.

Figure 2.

Guiding framework designed to represent the different types of interaction that can take place in a hybrid lesson. C stands for content, S stands for students and T for teacher.
Guiding framework designed to represent the different types of interaction that can take place in a hybrid lesson. C stands for content, S stands for students and T for teacher.

Figure 3.

Classroom setup. The grey rectangles depict the tables, the brown dots the students and the orange dots the teacher.
Classroom setup. The grey rectangles depict the tables, the brown dots the students and the orange dots the teacher.

Figure 4.

The differences in experienced transactional distance between the online and onsite students when looking at both the T-S interaction and the S-S interaction. T-S interaction = p < 0.001 and S-S interaction p < 0.001. The results of all meetings are averaged. To note, when the students score higher on the Likert scale, this means there is less transactional distance. S-S, student–student; T-S, teacher–student.
The differences in experienced transactional distance between the online and onsite students when looking at both the T-S interaction and the S-S interaction. T-S interaction = p < 0.001 and S-S interaction p < 0.001. The results of all meetings are averaged. To note, when the students score higher on the Likert scale, this means there is less transactional distance. S-S, student–student; T-S, teacher–student.

Figure 5.

Graph showing the average score of the different interactions related to transactional distance per meeting. Four constructs are shown in this graph: TOSS, SOSS, TOLS and SOLS. SOLS, student–online student; SOSS, student–onsite student; TOLS, teacher–online student; TOSS, teacher–onsite student.
Graph showing the average score of the different interactions related to transactional distance per meeting. Four constructs are shown in this graph: TOSS, SOSS, TOLS and SOLS. SOLS, student–online student; SOSS, student–onsite student; TOLS, teacher–online student; TOSS, teacher–onsite student.

Figure 6.

Overview scheme of the interaction happening during four lectures. In image (A), the interaction in lesson four is visible. In (B), the interaction in lesson five is visible. In (C), the interaction in lesson seven is visible, and in (D), the interaction in lesson eight is visible. The students are indicated as either S1 or SO1, with the O indicating that the student is online, and the teachers are shown as D1 and D2. Moreover, the blue blocks show when a student or teacher is saying anything, the green blocks show when there is a question asked, the orange blocks show when there is laughter in the classroom, and the arrows show when somebody is specifically asked something. Furthermore, the three blocks indicated by the numbers one, two, and three show specific interactions that will be further discussed in the text.
Overview scheme of the interaction happening during four lectures. In image (A), the interaction in lesson four is visible. In (B), the interaction in lesson five is visible. In (C), the interaction in lesson seven is visible, and in (D), the interaction in lesson eight is visible. The students are indicated as either S1 or SO1, with the O indicating that the student is online, and the teachers are shown as D1 and D2. Moreover, the blue blocks show when a student or teacher is saying anything, the green blocks show when there is a question asked, the orange blocks show when there is laughter in the classroom, and the arrows show when somebody is specifically asked something. Furthermore, the three blocks indicated by the numbers one, two, and three show specific interactions that will be further discussed in the text.

Figure 7.

Onsite student dialogue from Figure 6C box 1. The conversation was about a text students prepared for the lesson and happened while the teachers were switching between PowerPoints.
Onsite student dialogue from Figure 6C box 1. The conversation was about a text students prepared for the lesson and happened while the teachers were switching between PowerPoints.

Figure 8.

Student dialogue from Figure 6D box 2. The conversation is about a question the teachers asked; the online students follow up with a clarifying question, and then the conversation continues without the online student participating.
Student dialogue from Figure 6D box 2. The conversation is about a question the teachers asked; the online students follow up with a clarifying question, and then the conversation continues without the online student participating.

Figure 9.

Student dialogue from Figure 6D box 3. The conversation is about a question the teachers asked; the onsite students are discussing this question and their opinions. The online student only participates once the teachers ask them specifically about their opinion.
Student dialogue from Figure 6D box 3. The conversation is about a question the teachers asked; the onsite students are discussing this question and their opinions. The online student only participates once the teachers ask them specifically about their opinion.

Figure 10.

Results of the student interviews. Distribution of the quotes over the six different categories, in which red shows negative quotes, yellow shows neutral quotes, and green shows positive quotes (N = 62). The white bars indicate quotes that have no affective connotation.
Results of the student interviews. Distribution of the quotes over the six different categories, in which red shows negative quotes, yellow shows neutral quotes, and green shows positive quotes (N = 62). The white bars indicate quotes that have no affective connotation.

Figure 11.

Results from the teacher interviews. Distribution of the quotes over the seven different categories, in which red shows negative quotes, yellow shows neutral quotes, and green shows positive quotes (N = 26). The white bars indicate quotes that have no affective connotation.
Results from the teacher interviews. Distribution of the quotes over the seven different categories, in which red shows negative quotes, yellow shows neutral quotes, and green shows positive quotes (N = 26). The white bars indicate quotes that have no affective connotation.

An overview of recorded lectures, attendance, and where the students and teachers were present, with the online students shown in bold

Lectures
WhoLecture 4Lecture 5Lecture 6Lecture 7Lecture 8Lecture 9
S1OnsiteOnlineOnsiteOnsite–Onsite
S2OnsiteOnsiteOnsiteOnsiteOnsiteOnsite
S3OnsiteOnsiteOnlineOnsite––
S4Onsite–OnlineOnsiteOnsiteOnsite
S5Online–OnsiteOnsiteOnlineOnsite
S6OnsiteOnsiteOnsiteOnsiteOnsiteOnsite
D1OnsiteOnsiteOnsiteOnsiteOnsiteOnsite
D2OnsiteOnsiteOnsiteOnsiteOnlineOnsite

Overview of the types of codes for both the student and teacher interviews, subdivided by where the codes came from

Student
Teacher
Guiding frameworkInterviewsGuiding frameworkInterviews
Interaction_Formal_Student Online-Student onsite (I_F_SOL-SOS) Interaction_Formal_Student Onsite-Student onsite (I_F_SoS-SoS)Interaction_Informal (I_Informal)Interaction_Formal_Student Online-Student onsite (I_F_SOL-SOS)Interaction_Informal (I_Informal)
Interaction_Formal_Student online-Teacher (I_F_SOL-T)Students’ opinion on hybrid educationInteraction_Formal_Student online-Teacher (I_F_SOL-T)Organisation
Interaction_Formal_Student onsite-T (I_F_SOS-T) Interaction_Formal_Student onsite-T (I_F_SOS-T)Technical aspects
Teacher suggestions
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/eurodl-2025-0003 | Journal eISSN: 1027-5207
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 44 - 62
Published on: Feb 24, 2025
Published by: Sciendo
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 2 times per year
Keywords:
Hybrid education,
Interaction,
Tertiary education,
Transactional distance
Related subjects:
Social sciences,
Education,
Curriculum and pedagogy,
Education, other

© 2025 V.L. Ottenheim, R. Meulenbroeks, P. Drijvers, published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 27 (2025): Issue 1 (January 2025)Next article