The pedagogical approach of study in this paper is that of blended learning, i.e. a mix of face-to-face and e-learning instruction (Deepwell and Malik 2008; Martins and Kellermann 2004). We study the effect of one dimension, from within a culture framework, on the introduction to blended learning for business undergraduates at a university in the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

In this study we consult two culture frameworks for the insight they can offer the educator (Hofstede 1980, 1983; Project GLOBE [Global Leadership and Organizational Effectiveness] 2010). The researchers in Project GLOBE consider that

People are not generally aware of the tremendous impact that national culture has on their vision and interpretation of the world. Because culture colors nearly every aspect of human behavior, a working knowledge of culture and its influences can be useful to executives operating in a multicultural business environment. (Javidan et al. 2006, p. 67)

We contend that educators may not be aware of the impact of culture, and that it is useful for an educator to recognise the influence of culture on their students. For culture will impact both the perception of the learning environment and learner's behaviour. Of course this is equally true of the educator's vision and interpretation, but that is for a separate study.

In the culture model, the UAE is classified within the Middle East cluster of nations, and we investigate Uncertainty Avoidance (UA) because of the high score in that region for this cultural dimension (House, Javidan, and Dorfman 2001; Javidan et al. 2006; Kabasakal and Bodur 2002). UA is defined as “the extent to which the members of a culture feel threatened by ambiguous or unknown situations” (Hofstede, Hofstede, and Minkov 2010, p. 191).

A confidential survey to evaluate the introduction of blended learning was administered to three cohorts of students. Content analysis of collected narrative data revealed student certainty and uncertainty for the introduction of a blended learning environment. Three indicators of certainty with a blended learning environment were found: student skills in the use of technology; student acknowledgement of course organisation; and student appreciation of online feedback. Uncertainty with the blended environment was also indicated: challenges with online research; learner seeking clarification about online tasks; uncertainty with material; and increased time on task.

Awareness about the cultural dimension of UA increased this educator's ability to diagnose potential challenges that may affect the introduction of blended learning (Bailey 2006; Sulkowski and Deakin 2010). Some lessons learned, and changes in pedagogy are suggested as a consequence of the study. The findings add to the body of knowledge, as this is the first study to be conducted on the effect of a cultural dimension for the introduction of blended learning to undergraduates in the UAE.

The methodology is a mixed model, following Miles and Huberman (2002), that “quantitative and qualitative inquiry can support and inform each other” (p. 396). Similarly to Geçer and Dag (2012), in their study of a blended learning experience, we invoked qualitative methodology. There is also an element of a mixed methods approach in this research, as quantitative analysis of data is represented.

The findings from the content analysis are now explained in relation to stages 1-3 making reference to the illustrative quotations extracted from the data. In Table 1, we represent the findings in alphabetical order to avoid a hierarchy of importance being attached to the elements of the blended learning experience.

Themes emerged as we interpreted what students were saying about their experience of blended learning. The story is one of appreciation for new experiences, but these are changes to traditional teaching, which take time to be accepted.

There was appreciation for the organisation of assignment deadlines available to students in the LMS (quotation 1). However, data about assignments revealed increased time on task due to searching for quality sources in the virtual library (quotations 2 and 16). Comments about time on task were found in the context of “deadlines”, appearing at twice the rate in the uncertainty than the certainty classification. The course text and other materials are common to an American business curriculum, but lacked regional relevance (quotation 12). The introduction of local case studies posted in the LMS to ameliorate this was positively commented upon (quotation 11). Keywords, “knowledge” and “learn”, repeated narration about increased time spent on knowledge acquisition. Keywords “research” and “sources” were associated with the less positive classification (quotations 16) because of time and difference to the norm of searching online.

Learners commented on interaction as “different” in a blended classroom to the previous experience of a more traditional class. In quotation 9, there is appreciation for the acquisition of new knowledge and skills in each class. However, the key word “difference” also revealed uncertainty with change associated with new tasks (quotation 4), especially where change related to traditions in exam format. An “open laptop” exam format with individual questions (quotation 6) introduced the potential risk of failure for students. Unless students considered they had received a lot of practice, e.g. in online exam preparation (quotation 5) or in searching for sources (quotation 15).

,There were misconceptions also about unfamiliar activities, and a desire for more information expressed (quotation 10). Within this study of learners from a high UA culture, there was evidence of reliance on Professor feedback (quotation 13). The professor was also expected to be flexible in expectations for the use of technology. Quotation 14 relates to student use of competence with technology, but needing flexibility (reliant on teacher permission) in its use.

A learner revealed how knowledge was attained through online group work (quotation 7). The interpretation was that interaction is beneficial (quotation 3). Students appreciated group work, although there was a sense of uncertainty with unfamiliar classmates (quotation 8).

To follow is a discussion about the themes that arose as implications for teaching and learning when a blended environment is introduced to students with high UA.

The emergent themes revealed implications for changes in pedagogy to avoid uncertainty when introducing students to blended learning. These implications are contained in the final column of Table 1 and are considered further in this discussion.

Our study findings did not reveal student certainty or uncertainty about the shift to a more technologically supported classroom, concurring with findings related to this generation's familiarity with technology. However, as Bennett, Maton, and Kervin (2008) argue, familiarity with technological tools is not the whole debate, surrounding the introduction of learning technology for the “Net Generation”, of so called “digital natives” (p. 775). Our research firmly places culture into the debate about learning technology/blended learning. The cultural dimension of high UA requires the international educator to consider culture and adapt blended learning to avoid potential resistance by those who are risk averse to a new learning environment (Adeoye and Wentling 2007).

As there is a tendency for less structure in blended learning, those from cultures who prefer more structure may perceive the environment rather vague (Sulkowski and Deakin 2010). Uncertainty manifested itself through survey narrative in students’ requests for more structured learning, e.g. explicit verbal and written direction was wanted. Learners from clusters that rate high on UA indicate a preference for structured learning and expect the professor to have the correct answers (Eom, Wen, and Ashill 2006; Sulimma 2005).

The professor had made full use of the LMS (online calendar, e-mail responses and online gradebook). To structure the blended environment towards less ambiguity for students, there is an opportunity to post asynchronous “diagnostic feedback”, on why answers are wrong, and “prescriptive feedback”, on how the answers could be improved for next time (Eom, Wen, and Ashill 2006, p. 220). Although an educator risks student uncertainty, because of less structured pedagogy, employment preparation is of concern as more structure is considered to stifle innovation in the workplace (Kelly et al. 2006; Shane 1995).

Lectures as a mode of structured instructional delivery were complemented, in this blended environment, with instructor facilitation of online group activities (Eom, Wen, and Ashill 2006). When the professor changes her or his role from the more traditional delivery of knowledge to become a student guide towards online material and facilitator in online group discussion and projects, it can increase uncertainty for students. The professor assigned team membership to introduce cultural diversity into online groups (Hornik and Tupchiy 2006; Hwang and Francesco 2010; Hwang, Kessler, and Francesco 2004). However, students expressed their uncertainty on this practice through less than positive survey comments. A preference was for certainty in the attitudes of familiar others, known performance, or regular decision making (House, Javidan, and Dorfman 2001). The author subsequently allowed students to continue their normal practice of choosing group members for projects, which were attributed a higher percentage for assessment. However, for online discussions that carried less weight in the final grading criteria, the professor continued to assign student group members. This practice was aligned with skills needed for a global workplace, as team orientation is vital for the ability to work across boundaries, to influence people without formal authority and to lead teams composed of different cultures (DeRue and Wellman 2009).

Assignments were formulated to increase knowledge about local issues. Students in this region require exposure to management in the Arab world because many will be employed in the Middle East (Abderrahman and Storti 2011). Students were familiar with searching online through the Internet for sources to complete assignments. However, a pedagogical approach to improve research quality, through use of the virtual library, created uncertainty as extra time was needed to locate these sources. It was concluded in a study of UAE students, that they did not appreciate the differences “between what is offered by library e-services and web search engine”, and therefore, “seamless linking of e-learning and e-library” becomes crucial (Taha 2007, p. 359). Further links to library sources were embedded in the LMS, and a research workshop was later introduced in an attempt to ameliorate UA when searching for quality regional and global sources.

A change in the exam norm caused students to exhibit uncertainty, as revealed in narrative relating to perceived unfairness and increased time on activity. Education for those with high UA must “encourage gradual acquisition of knowledge and skills practiced in a supportive environment, where mistakes are never fatal” (Pech 2009, p. 61). Progressive change is suggested to reduce UA, e.g. a change to exam format, from written to electronic, followed later with other changes to exam procedure. The results agree with findings that learners from high UA cultures spend more time completing online tasks and attribute results to circumstances rather than acknowledging self-control for learning (Adeoye and Wentling 2007; Sulimma 2005). The introduction of blended learning makes necessary a longer view of time for knowledge acquisition, that is more fitting with learners from high UA cultures (Tang and Koveos 2008).

The mid semester LCLC survey addressed the research question, i.e. what evidence is there of learner uncertainty or certainty on the introduction of blended learning? To investigate the introduction of blended learning, an analysis of the cultural dimension of UA was conducted. Interpretation of certainty with blended learning was found in: student skills with technology; student acknowledgement of course organisation; and student appreciation of online feedback. Uncertainty with the introduction of blended learning was found: when membership was assigned for group work, higher quality research methods were introduced; where course structure lacked detail, increased time was required for new and different activities. Findings increased the international researcher's ability to interpret collected data on learner experiences within a cultural dimension (Kets de Vries 2004). A culture framework also offers valuable insights for the educator to effectively introduce blended learning to international students (Hofstede 1983; Hofstede, Hofstede, and Minkov 2010; House 2004; House, Hanges, and Ruiz-Quintanilla 1999).