Contents introduction Chapter I. The theoretical analysis of Blended learning

REFERENCES:
Acts and resolutions:

1. 
   The Constitution Of The Republic Of Uzbekistan,
   
2. 
   Education Act, 23 September 2020
   
3. 
   PQ-2909 of the president of the Republic of Uzbekistan dated April 20, 2017 "on measures for the further development of the higher education system,
   
4. 
   PQ-3775 decree of the President of the Republic of Uzbekistan dated June 5, 2018
   
5. 
   PQ-5117 Resolution of the President of the Republic of Uzbekistan, Sh.M. Mirziyoyev, dated 05.19.2021
   

Main literature

1. 
   Abdullaeva, G., & Yuldashev, A. (2019). The effectiveness of blended learning in improving English language proficiency of university students in Uzbekistan. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 19(79), 79-96.
   
2. 
   Kholmuminov, A. (2019). The effectiveness of blended learning in improving students' academic achievement in mathematics. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 14(19), 4-16.
   
3. 
   Mangutova A. (2021). Рекомендации по реализации педагогами смешанного обучения на уроках. Yaclass. - Москва, 23 p.
   

4. 
   Alammary, A., Sheard, J., & Carbone, A. (2014). Blended learning in higher education: Three different Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 30(4). https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.693
   
5. 
   Andrade, M. S., & Alden-Rivers, B. (2019). Developing a framework for sustainable growth of flexible learning opportunities. Higher Education Pedagogies, 4(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/23752696.2018.1564879
   
6. 
   Bruggeman, B., Tondeur, J., Struyven, K., Pynoo, B., Garone, A., & Vanslambrouck, S. (2021). Experts speaking: Crucial teacher attributes for implementing blended learning in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 48, 100772. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2020.100772
   
7. 
   Caskurlu, S., Richardson, J. C., Maeda, Y., & Kozan, K. (2021). The qualitative evidence behind the factors impacting online learning experiences as informed by the community of inquiry framework: A thematic synthesis. Computers & Education, 165, 104111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104111
   
8. 
   Cook-Sather, A., Bahti, M., & Ntem, A. (2019). Pedagogical Partnerships. Elon University Center for Engaged Learning.
   
9. 
   Ellis, R. A., Pardo, A., & Han, F. (2016). Quality in blended learning environments—Significant differences in how students approach learning collaborations. Computers & Education, 102, 90–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.07.006
   
10. 
    Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95-105.
    
11. 
    Goeman, K., De Grez, L., van den Muijsenberg, E., & Elen, J. (2020). Investigating the enactment of social presence in blended adult education. Educational Research, 62(3), 340–356. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2020.1796517
    
12. 
    Graham, C. R., Woodfield, W., & Harrison, J. B. (2013). A framework for institutional adoption and implementation of blended learning in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 18, 4-14.
    
13. 
    Heilporn, G., Lakhal, S., & Bélisle, M. (2021). An examination of teachers’ strategies to foster student engagement in blended learning in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18(1), 25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00260-3
    
14. 
    Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2014). Use of blended learning: Student perceptions of its effectiveness in higher education. Higher Education, 67(2), 271-283.
    

https://doi.org/10.36284/celelon.oa1

15. 
    Huang, J., Matthews, K. E., & Lodge, J. M. (2021). ‘The university doesn’t care about the impact it is having on us’: Academic experiences of the institutionalization of blended learning. Higher Education Research & Development, 41(5), 1557–1571. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2021.1915965
    
16. 
    Law, K. M. Y., Geng, S., & Li, T. (2019). Student enrollment, motivation and learning performance in a blended learning environment: The mediating effects of social, teaching, and cognitive presence. Computers & Education, 136, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.02.021
    
17. 
    Lowenthal, P. R., & Snelson, C. (2017). In search of a better understanding of social presence: An investigation into how researchers define social presence. Distance Education, 38(2), 141–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919 2017.1324727
    
18. 
    Müller et al. Int J Educ Technol High Educ (2023) 20:10 https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-022-00379-x
    
19. 
    Müller, C., Stahl, M., Alder, M., & Müller, M. (2018). Learning effectiveness and students’ perceptions in a flexible learning course. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 21(2), 44–53. https://doi.org/10.21256/zhaw-3189
    
20. 
    Oliver, M., & Trigwell, K. (2005). Can ‘blended learning be redeemed? E-Learning, 2(1), 17-26.
    

Internet resources:

21. 
    European Union (2019). Country report on Uzbekistan. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/sites/near/files/20190529-education-and-training-monitoring-report-2019-country-report-uzbekistan.pdf
    
22. 
    World Bank (2019). Uzbekistan higher education sector review: Reforms for quality, relevance, and competitiveness. Retrieved from https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/uzbekistan/publication/uzbekistan-higher-education-sector-review-reforms-for-quality-relevance-and-competitiveness
    
23. 
    Canva.com
    
24. 
    Moodle.com
    
25. 
    Quizlet.com
    
26. 
    Kahoot.com
    
27. 
    Quzalize.com
    
28. 
    Jamboard.com
    
29. 
    Blackboard.com
    
30. 
    Answersgarden.ch
    
31. 
    Padlet.com
    
32. 
    Socrative.com
    
33. 
    Classmarker.net