Designing Effective Blended Learning Experiences
Blended learning refers to the integration of face-to-face and online learning activities with the goal of maximizing the value of students' experiences in both settings. Since the value of blended learning lies in identifying situations in which technology-enhanced learning activities might prove more effective in supporting learning and in balancing those activities with face-to-face activities when appropriate, re-designing courses for a blended environment can prove a challenge.
Seminar
February 15, 2007
12:00-1:30 p.m.
155 Peters Hall
East Bank, Twin Cities campusSee the UMConnect Meeting recording
Subscribe to the podcast and vodcast
Panelists will discuss their experiences in targeting activities for online delivery, identifying and evaluating technology options, and managing the course redesign process.
Moderator:
Chris Scruton
Digital Media Center, Office of Information Technology, Twin Cities campus
Panelists:
Erica Stern, Peggy Martin, Cheryl Meyers
Occupational Therapy, CAHP, Twin Cities campus
Christina Clarkson, Tom Fletcher, Larry Wallace
Veterinary Medicine, AHC, Twin Cities campus
June LaValleur, Gwen Halaas, Philip Rauk, Brenda Buescher
Medical School, AHC, Twin Cities campus
Panelists' Projects
The panelists are working on the following 2006 TEL Grant Program blended learning projects:
Stern, Erica, Peggy Martin, and Cheryl Meyers. "Creating a Prototype Rehabilitation Case Scenario: Leveraging the Upgraded Interactive Scenario Builder (ISB)" 2006 Technology-Enhanced Learning Grant Program proposal. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 2006. http://dmc.umn.edu/grants/2006/stern.pdf.
Clarkson, Christina. "Veterinary Clinical Anatomy Integrated Learning Modules" 2006 Technology-Enhanced Learning Grant Program proposal. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 2006. http://dmc.umn.edu/grants/2006/clarkson.pdf.
LaValleur, June, Gwen Halaas, and Philip Rauk. "Technology-Enhanced Interactive Obstetric, Gynecology and Women's Health Education: Virtual Scenarios for Medical Student and Resident Education" 2006 Technology-Enhanced Learning Grant Program proposal. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 2006. http://dmc.umn.edu/grants/2006/lavalleur.pdf.
Preliminary Readings
Bonk, C.J., and C.R. Graham, C. R., eds. Handbook of Blended Learning: Global Perspectives, Local Designs. San Francisco: Pfeiffer Publishing, 2006.
This is a good review of current pedagogical research on blended learning complemented by a useful, if high level, overview of blended learning experiences from across the educational spectrum (sample chapters and the table of contents are available at http://www.publicationshare.com/). Case studies cover forays into blended learning by higher education institutions in North America, Europe, Australasia, the Middle East, and South Africa, and by corporations and for-profit online universities in the United States. There's some overlap between the contributors to this volume and a forthcoming work to be published by the Sloan Consortium, Blended Learning: Research Perspectives (table of contents available online), so I'd recommend reviewing the contents of both books before making a purchasing decision.
Davies, Alison, Jill Ramsay, Helen Lindfield, and John Couperthwaite. "A Blended Approach to Learning: Added Value and Lessons Learnt from Students' Use of Computer-Based Materials for Neurological Analysis." British Journal of Educational Technology 36, no. 5 (2005): 839–849.
This is a case study emphasizing the complementary value of a range of online and face-to-face modalities in preparing physical therapy students for clinical experiences. Course instructors used WebCT to deliver video clips of patients' movement disorders and to manage formative assessments. This enabled students to view and re-view didactic materials, to practice observational and diagnostic skills learned by assessing 'normal' movement in the face-to-face class, and to test their knowledge as much or as little as they deemed sufficient.
As a result, more students could be admitted to the physical therapy program. Cohort size increased by 83 percent, from 48 students to 88 students over a two-year period (p. 841).
The authors often provide telling insights on design-related topics ranging from choice of learning modality (e.g., discussing the factors affecting their decision to distribute video clips on CD-ROM versus the Web [p. 843]) to the combination and sequencing of those modalities in activities like mock examinations.
Post-experiment surveys and focus groups revealed that the use of digital video as a discussion trigger in the face-to-face portion of the class added value to the course experience of greater than 70 percent of respondents, improved their clinical skills, and afforded increased opportunities for peer-to-peer instruction (pp. 844Ð845). Evaluation data also suggested improvements in some previously unconsidered dimensions, such as the need for an audio track to accompany video clips of patients' movement dysfunctions. The designers had originally removed the existing audio to focus students' attention on motion in the visual field, but students in the focus group suggested that being able to hear the interaction between therapist and client might have further helped improve students' clinical practice (p. 845).
Students also expressed that using asynchronous video clips on CD-ROMs alone or in conjunction with online questions accessed in WebCT provided visualization and application benefits . Being able to see a patient with a particular dysfunction helped students' deepen their theoretical understanding and see in a holistic fashion what they may have previously understood simply as a disembodied or unsystematic collection of signs and symptoms Responding to questions provided a context in which students could apply their theoretical knowledge to a particular case, and the ability to view cases iteratively and to control playback were noted as particularly useful attributes of the online learning materials (see especially pp. 845Ð846).
However, students also expressed concerns about using computers for learning (particularly about using WebCT). These concerns were compounded when students took timed, graded exams. Although routine use of WebCT had led to improvement in their technology skills, the deadline stress and the particular methods employed to manage assessments in WebCT caused students significant stress and a lack of reported satisfaction with that particular modality (p. 847). The authors recommend that instructors offer exams in alternative formats (i.e., paper as well as online on an opt-in basis) to ameliorate exam stress. Another option is to offer educational technology literacy instruction upon matriculation into a program or entry into a course. Student then will be less likely to feel that an activity was "an exam in understanding instructions in the use of WebCT" (p. 847) rather than a test of students' skills and knowledge.
Graham, Charles. "Models of Blended Learning in Higher Education." Panel discussion presentation at the Sloan-C Workshop on Blended Learning In Higher Education, Chicago, Illinois, May 7–9, 2006. http://www.uic.edu/depts/oee/
blended/workshop/presentations/Models%20
of%20Blended%20Learning%20in%20Higher%20Ed.pdf.
Graham describes the importance of a mindful approach to course re-design and of identifying appropriate situations for employing technology and effective technology-enhanced learning practices based on research, evaluation, and the sharing of experiences (see "meaningful blends versus superficial blends," slide 9). He reviews the outcomes of a PEW-funded course redesign study as reported by Carol Twigg in her 2003 EDUCAUSE Review article, "Improving Learning and Reducing Costs (PDF)"). Twigg identified a range of categories of blends, from uses of technology that simply substitute online activities for face-to-face equivalents to fully online courses that either eliminate face-to-face contact altogether or replace it with on-demand tutoring. Graham notes that these categories can constructively be reduced to three (see slide 20ff).
- "Enabling Blends" don't involve pedagogical change, but instead seek to provide an equivalent experience to that experienced by face-to-face students. They are intended to address "issues of access and convenience" for distance students or those who prefer flexible schedules.
- "Enhancing Blends" add technology-enhanced materials to the course to extend it (i.e., by providing additional course experiences than might otherwise be possible in the normal classroom setting) or to improve students' experience (i.e., by providing technology-enhanced alternatives that afford students more choice about what activities they pursue and when and how they pursue them). Graham provides useful examples of enhancing blends in his description of programs like those at the University of Waikato in New Zealand that are stratified into four categories of blends, from those in which online components are supplementary and not required through those that require students to complete some, most, or all of their work online, each entailing appropriate pedagogical changes and support resources (see slide 23).
- "Transforming Blends" radically alter pedagogy by giving students the freedom to direct their own learning. Technology is used to immerse students in authentic environments that enhance their understanding of real-life performances (e.g., in virtual reality and simulation environments in which decision-support prompts and diagnostic data can be layered on top of sensory input; see slide 25).
Sloan Consortium. "Sloan-C Blended Learning." The Sloan Consortium. http://www.blendedteaching.org/.
This is perhaps the most comprehensive site available on blended teaching and learning. It provides access to a broad range of user-contributed resources and a discussion forum frequented by blended learning researchers and practitioners. Particularly valuable are the recordings of online seminars summarizing much of the material that will appear in Sloan-C's forthcoming book, Blended Learning: Research Perspectives.
Swan, Karen, and Randy Garrison. "Pedagogical Principles." Panel discussion presentation at the Sloan-C Workshop on Blended Learning In Higher Education, Chicago, Illinois, May 7–9, 2006. http://www.uic.edu/depts/oee/blended/workshop/
presentations/Pedagogical%20Principles.pdf.
Swan and Garrison develop theoretical frames for defining blended learning. Most importantly, they define it as an integration of face-to-face and online modalities, not a simple substitution. The design of such courses and programs ought to maximize the value of the experience by selecting modalities based on their suitability for achieving instructors' goals (Slide 14). Garrison is particularly concerned with developing communities of inquiry that support
- "social presence" (i.e., that employ technologies in such a way that students are able to "project themselves socially and emotionally as 'real' people"),
- "cognitive presence" (i.e., that afford ample opportunities for students to engage in discovery, application, and debate regarding the subjects at hand), and
- "teaching presence" (i.e., the capacity of instructors to structure and guide the learning process so that the outcomes of student inquiry can be assessed and verified as "educationally worthwhile learning outcomes"; see especially slides 15Ð16).
Vignare, Karen, et al. "Blended Learning Review of Research: An Annotated Bibliography." Resource for the Sloan-C Workshop on Blended Learning In Higher Education, Chicago, Illinois, May 7–9, 2006. http://www.uic.edu/depts/oee/blended/workshop/
documents/bibliography.pdf.
Although not exhaustive, Vignare et al. provide a synopsis of theoretical and practical concerns relevant to defining blended learning and identifying best practices in the design, development, management, and evaluation of hybrid and blended courses. Of particular interest is the authors' emphasis on
- the value of building knowledge communities with technology (see the authors' review of Bieber et al. for claims about the value of synchronous versus asynchronous collaboration and their reviews of Johnson, and Cottrell and Robinson, bolstering the findings of Davies et al. [cf] regarding the use of technology to expand access and decrease classroom time);
- the importance of the design process (see especially Vignare et al.'s reviews of Kerres and De Witt, Lohr and Ku, and Stein); and
- the necessity of adapting pedagogy appropriately to learning modalities (see the authors' reviews of Meyer, Vaughan and Garrison, and Wu and Hiltz for analyses relevant to the differences between effective face-to-face and online discussions).
This bibliography also includes a useful list of peer-reviewed journals that regularly feature research on blended learning.
