This study evaluates the effectiveness of Continuous Formative Assessment (CFA) in enhancing student learning outcomes within hybrid learning environments. Data was collected through surveys and tests involving a sample of 120 students. The findings indicate that 85% of students agree or strongly agree that CFA is a beneficial evaluation model for improving learning outcomes. The average score for students' opinions on CFA, based on a 4-point Likert scale, is 3.35 (standard deviation = 0.697), reflecting a positive perception. Additionally, a high average confidence score of 3.78 indicates that students can achieve the necessary learning attainment levels when implementing CFA. The study emphasizes that adopting CFA as a learning evaluation model is beneficial, but it requires lecturers to be dedicated and attentive to its implementation. Lecturers should carefully analyze current educational system policies and their chosen learning strategies. Recommendations for lecturers include integrating CFA with existing educational policies, providing continuous feedback, and adapting teaching methods based on assessment results. This research significantly contributes to the advancement of learning evaluation techniques and highlights CFA's potential impact on hybrid learning models. It underscores the importance of lecturer involvement in effectively implementing CFA and provides insights into students' perceptions and confidence in their learning attainment. The findings suggest that CFA can enhance learning outcomes and student confidence, with implications for future research and practice in educational evaluation and hybrid learning environments.

Al-Maroof, R., Al-Qaysi, N., Salloum, S. A., & Al-Emran, M. (2022). Blended learning acceptance: A systematic review of information systems models. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 27(3), 891–926. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-021-09519-0

Amanina Bizami, N., Tasir, Z., Kew, S. N., & My, N. S. (2022). Innovative pedagogical principles and technological tools capabilities for immersive, blended learning: A systematic literature review. Education and Information Technologies, 28(2), 1373–1425. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11243-w

Amirrudin, M., Nasution, K., & Supahar, S. (2021). Effect of variability on Cronbach Alpha reliability in research practice. Jurnal Matematika, Statistika dan Komputasi, 17(2), 223–230. https://doi.org/10.20956/jmsk.v17i2.11655

Anh, V. T. K. (2018). Evaluation models in the educational program: Strengths and weaknesses. VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, 34(2). https://doi.org/10.25073/2525-2445/vnufs.4252

Anwar Korompot, C. (2022). Study of perceptions on hybrid learning in teaching English at MTSN 4 Bone during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Technology in Language Pedagogy (JTechLP), 1(1), 27–37.

Aristika, A., Darhim, Juandi, D., & Kusnandi. (2021). The effectiveness of hybrid learning in improving of teacher-student relationship in terms of learning motivation. Emerging Science Journal, 5(4), 443–456. https://doi.org/10.28991/esj-2021-01288

Ashdale, M. (2020). The effect of formative assessment on achievement and motivation. https://doi.org/10.13016/m24ryz-ukky

Budiman, A., Samani, M., Rusijono, Setyawan, W. H., & Nurdyansyah. (2021). The development of direct-contextual learning: A new model on higher education. International Journal of Higher Education, 10(2), 15–26. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v10n2p15

Frye, A. W., & Hemmer, P. A. (2012). Program evaluation models and related theories: AMEE Guide No. 67. Medical Teacher, 34(5). https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159x.2012.668637

Goldfarb, S., & Morrison, G. (2014). Continuous curricular feedback: A formative evaluation approach to curricular improvement. Academic Medicine, 89(2), 264–269. https://doi.org/10.1097/acm.0000000000000103

Hakim, A., Nurhikmah, H. N., Halisa, N., Febriati, F., Aras, L., & Lutfi, B. L. (2023). The effect of online learning on student learning outcomes in Indonesian subjects. Journal of Innovation in Educational and Cultural Research, 4(1), 133–140. https://doi.org/10.46843/jiecr.v4i1.312

Hapke, H., Lee-Post, A., & Dean, T. (2021). 3-in-1 hybrid learning environment. Marketing Education Review, 31(2), 154–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/10528008.2020.1855989

Hill, J., & Smith, K. (2023). Visions of blended learning: Identifying the challenges and opportunities in shaping institutional approaches to blended learning in higher education. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 32(3), 289–303. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939x.2023.2176916

Ibrahim, M. M., & Nat, M. (2019). Blended learning motivation model for instructors in higher education institutions. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0145-2

Improta, G., Perrone, A., Russo, M. A., & Triassi, M. (2019). Health technology assessment (HTA) of optoelectronic biosensors for oncology by analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and Likert scale. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 19(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-019-0775-z

Kulasegaram, K., & Rangachari, P. K. (2018). Beyond “formative”: Assessments to enrich student learning. Advances in Physiology Education, 42(1), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00122.2017

Kwak, S. G., & Park, S. H. (2019). Normality test in clinical research. Journal of Rheumatic Diseases, 26(1), 5–11. https://doi.org/10.4078/jrd.2019.26.1.5

Landrum, B., Bannister, J., Garza, G., & Rhame, S. (2021). A class of one: Students’ satisfaction with online learning. Journal of Education for Business, 96(2), 82–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2020.1757592

Leenknecht, M., Wijnia, L., Köhlen, M., Fryer, L., Rikers, R., & Loyens, S. (2021). Formative assessment as practice: The role of students’ motivation. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 46(2), 236–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2020.1765228

Lo, C.-K., Ng, L.-K., & Lee, C.-L. (2022). Flipped classroom and gamification approach: Its impact on performance and academic commitment on sustainable learning in education. Sustainability, 14(9), 5428. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14095428

Malkewitz, C. P., Schwall, P., Meesters, C., & Hardt, J. (2023). Estimating reliability: A comparison of Cronbach’s α, McDonald’s ωt and the greatest lower bound. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 7(1), 100368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2022.100368

Mishra, P., Singh, U., Pandey, C. M., Mishra, P., & Pandey, G. (2019). Application of Student’s t-test, analysis of variance, and covariance. Annals of Cardiac Anaesthesia, 22(4), 407. https://doi.org/10.4103/aca.aca_94_19

Moscarelli, M. (2023). Hypothesis testing. In Biostatistics with “R”: A Guide for Medical Doctors (pp. 113–135). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33073-5_8

Myyryläinen, H., Pajari, A., Ledoux Tchasse Simo, W., Clerkx, M., Tegegn Admasu, G., & Hadjisoteriou, C. (2022). Educating social entrepreneurship competencies in higher education: Towards collaborative methods and ecosystem learning. Retrieved from http://www.theseus.fi/handle/10024/744127

Nørgård, R. T., & Hilli, C. (2022). Hyper-hybrid learning spaces in higher education. In Learning Spaces (pp. 25–41). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-88520-5_3

Nurunnabi, M., & Almusharraf, N. (2020). Social distancing and reopening universities after the COVID-19 pandemic: Policy complexity in G20 countries. Journal of Public Health Research, 9(s1), 50–59. https://doi.org/10.4081/jphr.2020.1957

Raes, A., Detienne, L., Windey, I., & Depaepe, F. (2020). A systematic literature review on synchronous hybrid learning: Gaps identified. Learning Environments Research, 23(3), 269–290. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-019-09303-z

Rafiola, R., Setyosari, P., Radjah, C., & Ramli, M. (2020). The effect of learning motivation, self-efficacy, and blended learning on student achievement in higher education. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 15(8), 71–82. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i08.12323

Romero-Rodriguez, J. M., Aznar-Diaz, I., Hinojo-Lucena, F. J., & Gomez-Garcia, G. (2020). Mobile learning in higher education: Structural equation model for good teaching practices. IEEE Access, 8, 91761–91769. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2020.2994967

Sanderson, N. C., Kessel, S., & Chen, W. (2022). What do faculty members know about universal design and digital accessibility? A qualitative study in computer science and engineering disciplines. Universal Access in the Information Society, 21(2), 351–365. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-022-00875-x

Sudakova, N. E., Savina, T. N., Masalimova, A. R., Mikhaylovsky, M. N., Karandeeva, L. G., & Zhdanov, S. P. (2022). Online formative assessment in higher education: Bibliometric analysis. Education Sciences, 12(3), 209. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12030209

Sürücü, L., & Maslakçı, A. (2020). Validity and reliability in quantitative research. Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 8(3), 2694–2726. https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v8i3.1540

Tan, S. (2023). Harnessing artificial intelligence for innovation in education. In Learning Intelligence: Innovative and Digital Transformative Learning Strategies: Cultural and Social Engineering Perspectives (pp. 335–363). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-9201-8_8

Urbano, J., Lima, H., & Hanjalic, A. (2019). Statistical significance testing in information retrieval: An empirical analysis of type I, type II and type III errors. SIGIR 2019 - Proceedings of the 42nd International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (pp. 505–514). https://doi.org/10.1145/3331184.3331259

Wijaya, M. M., & Budiman, M. (2021). Character development based on hybrid learning in the post-pandemic era. At-Ta’dib, 16(2), 170–179. https://doi.org/10.21111/at-tadib.v16i2.6736

Xiao, J., Sun-Lin, H. Z., Lin, T. H., Li, M., Pan, Z., & Cheng, H. C. (2020). What makes learners a good fit for hybrid learning? Learning competences as predictors of experience and satisfaction in hybrid learning space. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(4), 1203–1219. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12949

Yu, H., Zhang, J., & Zou, R. (2021). A motivational mechanism framework for teachers’ online informal learning and innovation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 601200. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.601200