Blended learning has become increasingly prominent in pre-service teacher education, yet evidence remains fragmented regarding how particular instructional design features relate to student engagement and learning outcomes. This systematic review synthesised empirical research on blended learning in pre-service teacher education, with particular attention to instructional design, engagement, and academic and professional outcomes. We identified studies through systematic database searching and screened them using predefined eligibility criteria. We coded eligible studies for methodological characteristics, instructional design features, forms of engagement evidence, outcome domains, and direction of findings, and appraised methodological quality using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. The synthesis identified six recurring and overlapping design themes, with alignment and sequencing, interaction and feedback, and autonomy and self-regulation particularly prominent. Engagement was represented inconsistently across the literature, ranging from direct measurement and proxy indicators to instances in which study authors invoked engagement without corresponding empirical indicators. Reported outcomes extended beyond academic achievement to include motivational, self-regulatory, technological, pedagogical, and professional dimensions. Although favourable findings were common, variation in research designs, measures, contexts, and methodological quality limits broad causal conclusions about blended learning effectiveness. The review indicates that blended learning in pre-service teacher education is better understood through the configuration and integration of its instructional components than as a uniform delivery model. Future research should more directly examine the pathways connecting instructional design, engagement, and academic and professional outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: