Blended Learning

Wendy L. Mahan, Ph.D.Instructional Designer, CHHD

My Background

Education Technology Services (ETS) Courseware Initiative 2003-2005 Blended Learning Initiative 2005-2007

CHHD/Nursing since Jan 2008

BLI – Quick History

General education courses Develop online version and hybrid version. Purpose: Curricular Integrity, efficient use of

resources, free up classrooms, student preferences.

Assessment completed by SITE.

Blended or Hybrid Course

F2FCompletely Online

WebEnhanced

HYBRID/ BLENDED

Broad Recommendations from the Literature• Redesign - don’t add on elements.

• Hold an initial kick-off meeting.

• Make students aware of what a hybrid course entails.

• Assist with time management skills.

• If using teams, do the following:

• Use early F2F meetings to establish community, roles and rules.

• Decrease these meetings as semester goes on.

• Ensure F2F meetings are of *value.*

Recommendations based on BLI Experience

• Kick off meetings are essential.• Face-to-face meetings must include active participation.• Face-to-face meetings must result in some type of points

earned.• Face-to-face meetings must be integrated with online materials,

and together, they must keep the student engaged during the week.

• Face-to-face meetings provide the opportunity to create better student-instructor interaction than online only.

• Developing an online course first, and then developing the hybrid is easier than vice versa.

Lessons learned based on BLI Experience

• If students find that they are not accountable for face-to-face meetings, attendance will drop – dramatically.

• Blended learning decreases class size and increases faculty workload – unless the designed correctly.

• If the online activities and face-to-face experience are not seamless and engaging, it is very easy for the student – and the faculty member – to forget about the class.

• Before choosing a day for the F2F meeting, decide on the design first.

How do you develop blended courses?

Table of Comparative Advantage

David Brown, VP and Dean of International Center for Computer Enhanced Learning at Wake Forest University.

This technique encourages one to place the right activities in their most appropriate environments.

Table of Comparative Advantage"What activities that I normally pursue in a traditional classroom can be transitioned online with the least loss in effectiveness?"

Activity F2F only Online Notes

Lectures Disadvantage

Advantage F2F passive; online can be made interactive and more adaptable to individual needs

Guest speakers

Disadvantage

Advantage Difficult to find someone free during class time; student who can’t attend cannot make it up.

Small Group discussions

Advantage Disadvantage Easier to communicate F2F, but run out of time frequently; could extend to online message boards

Table of Comparative Advantage"What activities that I normally pursue online that will increase in effectiveness if I move them back to a F2F format?

Activity F2F only Online Notes

Online Lessons Disadvantage Advantage Address individual learning needs; always accessible

Online Quizzes Disadvantage Advantage Self-scoring- lessens workload

Periodic Message board Discussions

Disadvantage Advantage Can’t do F2F due to large class size and room layout

Bullet-Proof Model (Troha, 2002)

1. Conduct a learner & context analysis of your course

2. List your learning objectives.

3. Conduct content analysis - course outline.

4. Identify the learning activities in the outline that would be the *best* in a face-to-face, traditional setting.

5. Identify the learning activities in the outline with the potential for online delivery.

6. Make final decisions about course delivery considering #1-#5:

Construction

Communication

Content

3-C Didactic Model (Kerres & De Witt, 2003)

Bloom’s Taxonomy

1. List learning objectives.

2. Classify each according to three components.

3. Determine how much of the course will be devoted to each type of component

Rule of Thumb: Content, 33%; Communication, 33%; Construction, 33% Mathematics: Content, 30%; Communication, 20%, Construction, 50% Nutrition: Content, 80%; Communication, 5%; Construction, 15%

4. Determine delivery system based on aspects of that particular course.

Who is the audience? Is group work involved? What are the costs (time, travel, cognitive demands, etc.)

3-C Didactic Model (Kerres & De Witt, 2003)

What do these models have in common?

Break down your content Identify the delivery method (online vs. F2F). Consider the above in conjunction with

targeted audience, context of instruction, available resources, etc.

Analysis and Design

Faculty workload/Access to

TAs

Individual characteristics of

faculty

Consistency of who will be teaching

semester to semester

No. of Students enrolled in course

Student MotivationLearning objectives/

content covered

Existing format of course

No. of meetings per week

My experienced confirmed…

Online

High Workload, no TAs

More research focused;

conservative

Taught by TAs

High enrollmentLow student motivation – required courseLower –level

objectives; survey course

Currently F2F format

Not enough to do in F2F or all F2F lectures

Things to consider

Hybrid

Reasonable Workload or access

to TAs

Teaching focused; adventurous

Same instructor teaches every

semester

Low enrollment (<30 students)

High student motivation ;major –related course

High level objectives

Currently online format

Variation in meetings lends itself to

collaborative projects

Things to consider

Example – UNT

What technologies can be used to create an ideal blended course?

ANGELBest for:• Online lessons• Posting links to online resources or placing articles on

course reserve.• Discussion forums• Quizzes

Advantages: In control of content, grading, secureDisadvantages: Storage issues, students view as rigid and constricting

Web 2.0 ToolsFor student-created, collaborative assignments and projects – some examples include:• Google Docs or Zoho• MyPlick• WetPaint• Ning• Gliffy• Toondo

Advantages: Encourages collaboration and creativity, low learning curve, freeDisadvantages: No control over content, copyright issues, grading

PSU Resources

Blogs @ Penn StateAdobe ConnectDigital Commons (student-created podcasts and videos)

Advantages: In control of content, secure, tech supportDisadvantages: technical glitches, frequent updates to new platforms, tech support, plus scheduling issues with Digital Commons

Questions?

ReferencesModels:Troha, F. J. (2002). Bulletproof instructional design: A model for blended learning. USDLA Journal, 16 (5). Retrieved October 20, 2005 from: http://www.usdla.org/html/journal/MAY02_Issue/article03.htmlKerres, M. & DeWitt, C. (2003). A didactic framework for the design of blended learning arrangements. Journal of Educational Media, 28(2-3). Retrieved September 2005 from: http://online-campus.net/edumedia/publications/Draft-JEM-BL.pdf

ExamplesUniversity of North Texas – Blended Learning Project: http://web3.unt.edu/cdl/BLP/index.cfm?M=Courses

Web 2.0 ToolsGoogle Docs: http://docs.google.comZoho: http://www.zoho.com/MyPlick: http://www.myplick.com/Ning: http://www.ning.com/Gliffy: http://www.gliffy.com/Toondo: http://www.toondoo.com/

PSU ResourcesBlogs at Penn State: http://blogs.psu.edu/Adobe Connect: http://meeting.psu.edu/forumDigital Commons: http://digitalcommons.psu.edu/