Republic of the Philippines

Trinidad Municipal College

College of Education

TECHNOLOGY IN LANGUAGE EDUCATION

LESSON 6: Designing for Blended Learning

Introduction

There has been significant growth in the use of blended learning. It is clear in research findings
that blended learning results in improved learning outcomes. The implementation of such blended course
structures and pedagogical choices are important to these outcomes. Less research is available about the
impact of implementation, but multiple models are at work. Graham, Wood field and Harrison (2013)
studied institutional adoption of blended learning at institutions at various stages of blended learning
adoption, including (1) awareness/exploration, (2) adoption/early implementation and (3) mature
implementation/ growth. Where is your school or institution in the process of blended learning
development?

What Is Blended Learning

Blended learning is a mixture of face-to-face time and online time in a class. Blended learning can include
anywhere from 20 to 80% of the course time online. Blended learning offers the instructor the opportunity
to extend the learning outside of the classroom, thus increasing the opportunities for students to connect
to each other, as well as the chance to utilize a wider array of online resources and technologies to
enhance the classroom time.

Institutions and Blended Learning

While many classroom teachers provide innovative teaching methods that can offer some form of
blended learning, institutional commitment as well as an institutional review and plan can provide much-
needed support and resources to ensure a comprehensive, evidence-based approach to blended learning.
Graham, Wood field and Harrison (2013) provide a caution, as indicated earlier: just using the Internet or
technology in some way does not mean the learning is blended. Figure 4.1 makes this idea clearer.

Blended learning requires the detailed combination of learning activities using in-person and
online environments, each of which will include interaction, material distribution, learning facilitation,
direct instruction and, if using a COL approach, constructed organisation and design throughout the
course, with dedicated student participation and critical reflection.

1
Figure 4.1. Blended learning in context

It is imprudent to try to specify how much course time should be dedicated to in-person or online
interactions without considering the teaching and learning transactions, which depend on the subject, the
type of materials, and the needs of the students. As the design moves from its initial conception to a later
stage, the proportion may change. Some students may spend more time online in their interactions with
peers, the instructor and the material, and may be less active in person. Or it may be the other way
around.

This personalised, dynamic, constructed approach to blended learning has implications for the
implementation of blended learning in schools and institutions. For Masoumi and Linström (2012), the
integration of technology-enabled learning requires a comprehensive set of interventions to create an “e-
quality infrastructure.” The infrastructure is represented in their E-quality Framework, shown in Figure
4.2.

Figure 4.2. E-quality framework (adapted from Masoumi & Lindström, 2012).

2
Each category and subcategory listed below is outlined by Masoumi and Lindström (2012). Highlighted
here are some critical pieces to consider for instructors wishing to add blended learning to their courses.

Technological factors are identified by instructors as the most relevant for blended learning, and the most
challenging. You could begin by assessing your institution for available resources. Most important are
sustainable and well-functioning technological infrastructures, accessibility and a usable and appealing
interface design. Take time to assess what is available to you in your school, school board or surrounding
area. Ideally, not only will these resources be available but instructors will have technical assistance to
develop courses with a range of technologies, administrative support and pedagogical support to reference
a range of learning theories and instructional activities. If you are in position to request these things so as
to guide your institution or board in creating the needed technology infrastructure for blended learning,
make use of Masoumi and Lindström’s valuable resource to consider all necessary infrastructure
resources for quality blended learning.

Instructors are often thrown into technology-enabled learning with little or no technical and professional
development to assist them in adding technology to create a blended learning environment, particularly in
developing countries (Stoyanov &Kirschner, 2004). If this is a do-it-yourself project, you may have to
look to available resources for possible ways to use technology and engage students both in person and
online.

Understand Enticers and Barriers to Blended Learning

This guidebook offers a comprehensive view of models and opportunities found in the blended learning
space. Like any new way of doing things, there are both benefits and challenges to implementing
innovative processes and products. We’ve referred to them as barriers and entices, language from Lewin’s
Force Field Analysis for assessing any new activity (Mind Tools Videos, 2018).

Here is a start to creating your own list of the benefits and challenges of creating blending courses and
programmers in your institution (Digital Chalk, 2014):

Benefits

 Opportunities for collaborative learning. Online learning spaces offer greater, more engaging
collaboration experiences between students and instructors. These opportunities include
collaborative tools such as online forum discussions, wikis, blogs, chat, etc. Through these tools,
collaborative connections are available in or out of the online classroom.
 Improved accessibility. Access to classroom and online materials and communication provides
convenience and learning skill development.
 Communication improvement. Teachers can reach part-time or full-time students through
multiple communication channels. Learning management systems offer many communication
opportunities: email, chat, news, forums, assignment spaces, etc.
 Assessment strategies. Student evaluations of both formative and summative feedback can be
more detailed and frequent through online reporting structures. Self-evaluation and practice
assessments can improve engagement and learning.

Challenges

3
  Technological requirements. Technological requirements include hardware, software and
Internet access with appropriate bandwidth. These resource requirements can create systematic
lack of access. Technology tools must be available, user-friendly, reliable and current for Inter-
net use to support learning in a meaningful way.
 IT knowledge and skill. Termed IT literacy, preparation for use of technological tools is
required. Lack of such knowledge and skill is a significant barrier to access in the first place and
quality learning experiences thereafter. Access to technical support is a related and significant
requirement.
 Lack of self pacing and self direction. Online learning both requires and encourages learner
independence and management. For example, some research suggest that many students will
watch multiple weeks’ worth of video lectures at once rather than according to course structure.
Students come to online learning with varying degrees of learning competence; supporting such
learning self-management should be part of all online learning experiences.

The classroom environment is well suited for:

• Discussion of abstract content, brainstorming, and planning

• Guest speakers who are nearby

• Practicing interpersonal skills and presentations

• Discussion of practices and processes

• Review of assignments

• Group discussions, role play, debate, speaking practice

• Providing practice and feedback to students on complex or ill-defined tasks

• Hands-on learning requiring the use of specialized materials that are difficult to obtain or use without
instructor supervision

The online environment is well-suited for:

• Reading and asynchronous discussion

• Synchronous sessions with remote guests

• Team project development in online space

• Peer review

• Video and text-based cases

• Reading and asynchronous discussion

• Video and other media

• Presentations as background for skill development

4
• Repeated practice with concepts and skills using tools that allow students to work at their own pace,
including with interactive manipulatives, games, and simulations

• Reading, viewing and listening, followed by independent reflection

• Connecting virtually for conversations and mentoring and remove students or experts, conducing web
surveys, or online book groups

• Working on multi-media projects and sharing them with a wide audience

• Learning from and creating graphic organizers

• Individualized tutoring with synchronous communication tools and cyber study groups

• Knowledge checks using quizzes with automated feedback

• Peer review of student work

Peer-Review Instructional Design and Blended Course

Development Plans
The peer-review process is the most respected means of testing scholarship quality. From this review
comes support, intellectual development, shared resources and verified knowledge claims. Peer review,
however, is rare in course design and instruction. At Athabasca University (AU), course design follows a
phased creation process, which includes a principal designer as well as peer consultants, a web analyst for
technology advice and a professional instructional designer. This can provide quality assurance; 97% of
our students leave our programmers ranking their education experience at AU as very good. If there is no
opportunity to engage a web analyst or instructional designer at your school or institution, there is usually
still the opportunity to engage in peer review.

If you do research as part of your job, you can use your course design and delivery as a research project
as well. Ernest Boyer (1990) has named this the “scholarship of teaching and learning.”

Writing Learning Objectives and Learning Outcomes

Learning objectives set benchmarks for learning activities, while learning outcomes set measurable
outcomes to be realized from those objectives. The creative work of identifying both learning objectives
and learning outcomes is part of any educational development exercise and falls under the label of
instructional design.

How does the process of writing learning objectives and outcomes change with the move to blended
learning? Instructional designs bridging both in-person and online learning must include appropriate
learning activities for each, and activities that link the two environments become a new and critical area
for learning objectives. For example, online learning activities will be specified where digital materials
are used to add video, audio and graphics; troubleshooting or problem solving is best done in person; and
collaborative activities will be specified where digital materials are used to add video, audio and graphics;
troubleshooting or problem solving is the best done in person; and collaborative activities should begin in
person learning activities must reference and build upon online learning activities. For example, an in-
person session can start with a review of recent online activities; conversely, adding materials or asking

5
 questions in a new online post should reference recent in-person activities These bridging activities are
key to a successful blended learning course. For more on this, see Vaughan, Cleveland-Innes and
Garrison (2013).

Consider How Subject Matter May Influence Blended Learning

We know that teaching, instructional design and online learning are affected by the subject matter being
taught (Arbaugh, Bangert and Cleveland-Innes, 2010). Some subjects may be supported best through
hands-on learning in person, such as in science labs or art rooms. That doesn’t mean it isn’t possible to
simulate science labs online, or teach art through video presentation or videoconferencing with students.
Choosing which learning activities to assign to online spaces and which to assign to in-person learning
should be done in reference to the subject you are teaching.

     Student Needs Assessment

If we return for a moment to an earlier point, we are reminded that evaluating the overall readiness for a
blended programe includes an assessment of the learners’ needs and preparedness for blended learning.
Most learner needs assessments are generic and can be created by you in a way that determines how well
learner needs align with blended learning.

Some of the areas that you can ask yourself about your learners’ needs are:

 Should I gather information about learners’ backgrounds? If so how I will use it?
 What kinds of access to technology do my students have?
 How will they use these technologies, and what is their skill level?

Specific questions about learner needs in reference to blended learning center on the need for flexibility,
technical skill, technology access and learning preferences. Most learners will have the relatively simple
and common skills of listening and note-taking in the classroom. Working online requires different skills,
but the more convenient, media-rich online environment offers increased engagement opportunities for
diverse learners. Most importantly, the online environment provides practice in becoming a virtual
citizen, particularly in working and learning with diverse others in mediated communication and
information-rich, web-based learning spaces.

Aligning Assessment and Learning  Objectives

There is student needs assessment prior to designing a blended learning course, and then there is
assessment of learning within a blended learning course. As with course design, assessment of learning
has to align with the course’s learning objectives. John Biggs (2003) provides a design model for
assessment that ensures consistency from learning objectives to assessment strategies, and from
assessment strategies to teaching and learning activities, illustrated in Figure 4.3.

6
Figure 4.3. Aligning assessment with learning objectives (adapted from UCD
Teaching and Learning  [n.d.])
The book Teaching in Blended Learning Environments: Creating and Sustaining Communities of
Inquiry (Vaughan et al, 2013) focuses on practices required of blended learning approaches and designs,
including a chapter on assessment. Here, we emphasize three important points about assessment.

First, consider using both formative and summative assessment. In formative assessment, learning is
reviewed and supported, but work is shaped and the learner continues to produce products that
demonstrate knowledge and skill; this allows the diagnosis of any misunderstandings and provides
feedback and guidance for continued progress. Summative assessment, on the other hand, is where
learning is demonstrated and graded.

Second, we know from the literature on deep learning that assessment has a significant impact on
outcomes. Assessing learning through activities involving application, problem solving and creativity
fosters deep, meaningful learning.

Finally, graded activities that include collaboration and constructed thought, activity and products will
also encourage students to engage in deep learning. Assessment activities can include group projects, peer
assessments, presentations, theory and model building and structured academic debate. For more, see
Chapter 5 of Vaughan, Cleveland-Innes and Garrison (2013).

CONCLUSION

7
 In this chapter, we have considered the implementation of blended learning both within a larger
institutional framework and at the level of an individual course or programmer.

While individual teachers can often create small-scale, innovative blended learning experiences within
their classrooms, larger and sustainable change typically requires the commitment, support and resources
of an institution. We began with an overview of Masoumi and Lindström’s E-quality Framework, which
maps out the key factors — from institutional to pedagogical to evaluation — that should be considered
when assessing your institution’s readiness for technology-enhanced or blended learning, as well as the
resources that are available or required. We also re-emphasized an important point in planning any
blended learning programme: the balance between online and in-person learning is dependent on your
individual educational goals and situation; trying to specify a precise mix in advance is usually
counterproductive.

We then considered some of the entices and barriers, or pros and cons, of implementing blended learning
at an institutional level. While the barriers may create some resistance to adopting new blended
programmes, they are also useful for indicating the range of supports necessary for successful
implementation, including technological support and learner support. Establishing a peer-reviewed
instructional design process can be an effective way to ensure high-quality learning materials and
activities.

We then turned to key instructional design principles for implementing blended learning programms or
courses; the writing of learning objectives and learning outcomes was seen as central to this process. In
blended learning, objectives and activities must be specified for each mode — online and in-person — but
also for bridging the two, with activities beginning online and then continuing in person or vice versa.
This bridging or referencing between online and in-person activities is critical; the two forms of learning
should not seem isolated from each other. We also emphasized how the subject matter may influence the
mix of your blended course or programme, as well as the importance of a thorough student needs
assessment. A final consideration in implementing a blended course or programme is the alignment
between the learning objectives and assessment activities, including both formative and summative
assessment and assessments that encourage deep learning.

REFLECTION QUESTIONS
1. How will you use learning objectives and learning outcomes when designing blended learning?