Blended learning has transformed medical education, offering a flexible approach that balances in-person and online learning. At Queen Mary, the graduate-entry MBBS programme (GEP) follows a structured model: one asynchronous learning day per week, complemented by four days of in-person teaching. This approach, the development of which was supported by a Health Education England grant, aims to make medical education more accessible while maintaining rigorous academic standards. We caught up with graduate-entry MBBS students Adrita Kabir and Joshua Soane to explore their experiences with blended learning and its impact on well-being and motivation. Adrita and Joshua partnered with the programme team to evaluate the programme, conducting focus groups throughout the year in which students widely praised the blended approach.
Benefits of blended learning for well-being and motivation
A key advantage of this model, as emphasized in the focus group, is its positive impact on student well-being and motivation. The flexibility of one asynchronous learning day per week allows students to manage their workload independently while maintaining a sense of control over their schedules. This autonomy supports mental well-being, reducing stress associated with commuting and rigid timetables, while also fostering motivation by enabling students to engage with learning at their own pace.
“One of the things most appreciated by students was the flexibility,” said Adrita Kabir. “Having a fixed asynchronous learning day meant we could take care of admin tasks, attend GP appointments, or balance other commitments.” Most importantly, the blended mode of learning improves accessibility for those whose work or caring commitments prevent full-time, in-person medical study.
For many graduate-entry students, who had previously studied during the COVID-19 era, online learning provided a familiar structure. The ability to revisit recorded lectures, engage with materials in a self-directed way, and structure learning around personal needs helped sustain motivation by giving students ownership of their studies.
However, Adrita and Joshua emphasized that one asynchronous day per week is the right balance to maintain engagement and avoid isolation. “More than one day could negatively impact collaboration and engagement in campus learning,” Adrita noted. Regular in-person interactions remain essential for peer support, shared motivation, and the sense of community that contributes to well-being in a demanding medical program.
Further enhancing the blended learning experience
While the flexibility of blended learning has been widely appreciated, students identified opportunities to enhance engagement and support. One key area was real-time academic interaction, particularly for complex topics. “For more complex topics, it’s useful to have the lecturer in front of you,” Adrita explained. “They can gauge students’ reactions, adjust their explanations, and answer questions immediately.” Another suggestion from the focus group is to incorporate forums on the sites where asynchronous lectures and learning activities are available, as this would enhance engagement.
The asynchronous workload was another area where adjustments improved student well-being. Initially, the volume of content was challenging to complete in a single day. “We were expected to complete everything in one day, but many of us had other responsibilities,” Joshua said. However, the academic team was highly responsive to student feedback, implementing a prioritized approach to content delivery. This adjustment helped students focus on essential material while allowing flexibility for extended learning.
Students also emphasized the importance of consistent teaching approaches to enhance engagement. Some lecturers successfully integrated quizzes, case-based scenarios, and interactive elements, making asynchronous learning more dynamic. “The most effective sessions had short recordings with regular stop points for questions,” Joshua recalled. “One lecturer even included interactive pauses where we had to answer questions before continuing. It felt more like they were talking directly to us, which was really useful.”
Joshua and Adrita’s focus groups highlighted the importance of strong digital accessibility, including reliable WiFi, device support, and a user-friendly QMPlus interface. They emphasized that providing captions, transcripts, alternative formats, and university support for technology access can help with the success of a blended programme and alleviate anxiety from many students.
Building a learning community
Despite working independently on asynchronous days, students remained engaged in their learning community through various communication channels. While most did not formally collaborate online, they reached out to peers when they had questions, often using group chats or informal discussions to clarify content.
“We didn’t work together much on asynchronous days,” Joshua admitted. “But if we had questions, we would message each other, and when we came back, we would talk about what we found challenging. That discussion reinforced our learning and kept the community aspect alive.”
Rather than limiting peer interaction, the asynchronous day became a preparatory stage for deeper engagement during in-person sessions. The four days of synchronous learning allowed students to build on their independent study, share insights, and collaborate effectively—demonstrating that a learning community extends beyond real-time interaction to include preparation and reflection.
Future of blended learning in medical education
As the conversation concluded, Adrita and Joshua reflected on the future of blended learning and its role in medical education.
“Blended learning is a great mode, but it needs to be well-structured and supported,” Adrita emphasized. “When our educators provide clear guidance, it helps us build a stronger, more supportive learning community.”
Joshua highlighted the importance of consistency across modules, ensuring that all students benefit from a well-designed and engaging learning experience. “Academics wanted to engage with blended learning, but they needed clearer guidance to ensure a consistent experience across modules.”
Both students praised the Learning Innovation Team for their openness to feedback and commitment to improvement. “What we appreciated was how responsive the team was,” Adrita said. “When we raised issues, changes were implemented quickly.”
Their experiences and insights have contributed to an ongoing research project on blended learning in medical education. A manuscript based on their findings has been submitted for publication in an academic journal.