Transitioning to blended learning


Published on

The following presentation is an overview of the what, the why, and the how to transition to blended learning.

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Transitioning to blended learning

  1. 1. Michelle Post, Ph.D.
  2. 2. Elliott Masie (2006) states, “All learning is blended learning.” “Great learning is blended.” ©Michelle Post, Ph.D. 10/12/2012 2
  3. 3.  Definition of Blended Learning Why Blended Learning Importance of Blended Learning Six Issues of Blended Learning Advantages / Disadvantages of Blended Learning Different Levels of Blended Learning Categories of Blended Learning Pedagogical Techniques for eLearning ©Michelle Post, Ph.D. 10/12/2012 3
  4. 4.  Transitioning Faculty to Blended Learning Hoffman’s BL Train-the Trainer Training Agenda Tools for Faculty Teaching in a Blended Learning Format What Does the Future Hold for Blended Learning Emerging Technologies for eLearning Future Trends in Blended Learning References Resources ©Michelle Post, Ph.D. 10/12/2012 4
  5. 5. “Blended learning systems combing face-to-face instruction with computer- mediated instruction.” (Graham, 2006, p. 5) ©Michelle Post, Ph.D. 10/12/2012 5
  6. 6. Per Osguthorpe and Graham (2003) there are six reasons for the use of blended learning.1. Pedagogical richness2. Access to knowledge3. Social interaction4. Personal agency5. Cost-effectiveness6. Ease of revision ©Michelle Post, Ph.D. 10/12/2012 6
  7. 7.  “American Society for Training and Development identified blended learning as one of the top ten trends to emerge in the knowledge delivery industry” (Rooney, 2003 as cited in Bonk & Graham, 2006, p. 3) The President of Pennsylvania State University was quoted as saying, “that the convergence between online and residential instruction was the single-greatest unrecognized trend in higher education today” (Young, 2002, as cited in Bonk & Graham, 2006, p. 3) ©Michelle Post, Ph.D. 10/12/2012 7
  8. 8. 1. The role of live interaction2. The role of learner choice and self- regulation3. Models for support and training4. Finding balance between innovation and production5. Cultural adaptation6. Dealing with the digital divide (Graham, 2006, p. 14) ©Michelle Post, Ph.D. 10/12/2012 8
  9. 9.  Opportunities to create  Time requirements learning communities  Faculty to student Less class time with use relationship of Internet  Technology support Flexibility  Learning curve for both faculty and student in Increased interaction learning the technologies from students  Longer prep time when Best of both worlds (F2F teaching in a blended and BL) environment Improved technology  Faculty perceptions of skills blended learning Asynchronous  Student perceptions of communications blended learningAdvantages Disadvantages ©Michelle Post, Ph.D. 10/12/2012 9
  10. 10. Graham (2006) identify four levels of blended learning1. Activity-Level Blending – this level occurs “when a learning activity contains both face-to-face and computer-mediated (CM) elements.”2. Course-Level Blending – this level is the most common way to blend and is a “combination of distinct face-to-face and CM activities used as part of a course.” ©Michelle Post, Ph.D. 10/12/2012 10
  11. 11. 3. Program-Level Blending – blending at this level could be one of two models: (1) a learner chooses a mix in his/her program of face-to-face with online, or (2) the learner’s program is prescribed with a mixture of face-to-face and online already.4. Institutional-Level Blending – this model is where the institution has chosen to blend its course offerings in a blended model with face-to-face and CM instruction. ©Michelle Post, Ph.D. 10/12/2012 11
  12. 12.  Enabling blends – focuses on addressing issues of access and convenience Enhancing blends – focuses on incremental changes to the pedagogy but do not radically change the way teaching and learning occurs Transforming blends – focuses on a radical transformation of the pedagogy (Graham, 2006, p. 13) ©Michelle Post, Ph.D. 10/12/2012 12
  13. 13. Bonk, Kim, & Zeng (2006) identified the following 12 pedagogical techniques.1. Group problem-solving and collaborative tasks2. Problem-based learning3. Discussion4. Case-based strategies5. Simulation or role play6. Student-generated content ©Michelle Post, Ph.D. 10/12/2012 13
  14. 14. 7. Coaching and mentoring8. Guided learning9. Exploratory or discovery10. Lecturing or teacher-directed activities11. Modeling of the solution process12. Socratic questioning ©Michelle Post, Ph.D. 10/12/2012 14
  15. 15.  The Organization (Support) – Has the budget and staff to support blended learning development. The organization needs to view a move to blended learning as a change initiative. The organization needs to be ready, willing, and able to make the change to a blended learning environment. (Hofmann, 2006, p. 39) The Course Designers – “Blending technologies that take advantage of learning styles, learner convenience, and the best practices of instructional design enable course developers to create programs that engage the learner and maximize learning retention” (Hofmann, 2006, p. 29). Faculty - “. . . The entire blended learning experience, including the self-directed components, is instructor led” (Hofmann, 2006, p. 35). Learners (customers) – Learners can aid in the creation of life long relationships through blended learning ©Michelle Post, Ph.D. 10/12/2012 15
  16. 16.  Facilitators need to approach a blended environment just as they would a traditional teaching environment Facilitators need to learn from their mistakes --- and not be afraid to make mistakes Facilitators need to participate in as many blended learning opportunities as possible Facilitators need to learn ALL of the technologies of a blended learning environment Facilitators need to know how to facilitate each individual technologies Practice, Practice, Practice ©Michelle Post, Ph.D. 10/12/2012 16
  17. 17. Learn How to E-Learning The Basics of Collaboratory! Ready, Willing,Learn Online 101 Blending and Able Session 1 Session 2 Session 3 Session 4 Session 5Focuses on Addresses Introduces Hands-on, Addresseslearning in the definitions and blending experiential preparing theonline terminology, asynchronous, interaction with learners forenvironment; demonstrates synchronous, various delivery online learningdemystifies the various delivery and traditional technologiestechnology for technologies, learningthe participants and introduces technologiesso they have a the changingpositive learning roles of instructional designers, facilitators, and learners ©Michelle Post, Ph.D. 10/12/2012 17
  18. 18. More on Facilitating Creating Final Project Implementing Blended Online Materials for E-Learning Learning Learning the Blended Within the Design Classroom Organization Session 6 Session 7 Session 8 Practicum Session 9After Focuses on Provides design In this Discussesintroducing a online strategies for individualized partnering withmedia selection interactions and creating learner- project, IT, vendors,matrix, the nuances of centered participants consultants ,participants facilitating materials that design, andwork in synchronous, tie together assemble, and managementbreakout rooms asynchronous synchronous deliver a and theto create deliveries, and and blended marketing of theblended blended; teaches asynchronous program. e-learningsolutions based the critical steps components of initiative toon case study to prepare to blended online ensure itsexamples train online. programs. acceptance and success. ©Michelle Post, Ph.D. 10/12/2012 18
  19. 19. Dr. Post (2012) Suggests: “There is no limitation on the tools to aid a faculty in the teaching of a blended learning course. The number of potential tools that can be incorporated into a blended learning course is only limited by the faculty’s imagination and experience. The best tool a faculty member can use for a blended learning course is their own willingness to learn about a variety of technologies, play with the technologies, and then try a technology in their course (one at a time). Not all technologies will work in a blended learning course. There are so many resources available from books, blogs, websites, and more. A faculty member just needs to take at least one hour a week to research ways to enhance the blended learning course.” See the Resource slide for some websites and blogs to review. ©Michelle Post, Ph.D. 10/12/2012 19
  20. 20.  Graham (2006) states, “We live in a world in which technological innovation is occurring at breakneck speed and digital technologies are increasingly becoming an integral part of our lives” (p. 16). Ross and Gage (2006) states, “that the future learning systems will be differentiated not based on whether they (institution) blend, but rather how they blend” (p. 14). ©Michelle Post, Ph.D. 10/12/2012 20
  21. 21. Bonk, Kim, & Zeng (2006) identified the following emergent technologies. Digital portfolios Assistive technology Simulations and games Digital libraries Peer-to-peer collaborative tools Wireless technology Reusable content objects ©Michelle Post, Ph.D. 10/12/2012 21
  22. 22. 1. Mobile blended learning2. Greater visualization, individualization, and hands-on learning3. Self-determined blended learning4. Increased connectedness, community, and collaboration5. Increased authenticity and on-demand learning ©Michelle Post, Ph.D. 10/12/2012 22
  23. 23. 6. Linking work and learning7. Changed calendaring8. Blended learning course designations9. Changed instructor roles10. The emergence of blended learning specialists ©Michelle Post, Ph.D. 10/12/2012 23
  24. 24. Bonk, C. J., & Graham, C. R. (2006). The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.Bonk, C. J., Kim, K., & Zeng, T. (2006). Future directions of blended learning in higher education and workplace learning settings. In C. J. Bonk & C. R. Graham, The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.Dziuban, C., Moskal, P., & Hartman, J. (n.d.). Higher education, blended learning and the generations: Knowledge is power no more. Orlando, FL: University of Central Florida.Hoffman, J. (2006). Why blended learning hasn’t (yet) fulfilled its promises: Answers to those questions that keep you up at night. In C. J. Bonk & C. R. Graham, The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons. ©Michelle Post, Ph.D. 10/12/2012 24
  25. 25. Masie, E. (2006). The blended learning imperative. In C. J. Bonk & C. R. Graham, The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.Osguthorpe, R. T., & Graham, C. R. (2003). Blended learning systems: Definitions and directions. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 4(3), 227-234.Rooney, J. E. (2003). Blending learning opportunities to enhance educational programming and meetings. Association Management, 55(5), 26-32.Ross, B., & Gage, K. (2006). Global perspectives on blending learning: Inside from WebCT and our customers in higher education. In C. J. Bonk & C. R. Graham, The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.Young, J. R. (2002, March 22). “Hybrid” teaching seeks to end the divide between traditional and online instruction. Chronicle of Higher Education, p. A33. ©Michelle Post, Ph.D. 10/12/2012 25
  26. 26.  Center for Learning & Performance Technologies - Classroom 2.0 - Educause - Edudemic - FacultyFocus - Free Tech 4 Teachers - International Society for Technology in Eduation (ISTE) - Merlot - TES - ©Michelle Post, Ph.D. 10/12/2012 26
  27. 27. Michelle Post, Ph.D., MBA Email: Web: Linkedin: Twitter: ©Michelle Post, Ph.D. 10/12/2012 27