Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Framing Blended learning, teaching, and education

39 views

Published on

Framing Blended learning, teaching, and education by Stephan Poelmans from KU Leuven During the EMBED event 'Implementing the European Maturity Model for Blended Education' 22 January 2020

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Framing Blended learning, teaching, and education

  1. 1. Presenter : Stephan Poelmans, KU Leuven, Stephan.Poelmans@kuleuven.be KU Leuven Team: Katie Goeman Stephan Poelmans Veerle Van Rompaey Anneleen Cosemans Elke Van der Stappen Faculty of Economics and Business, LIRIS research group Educational Development Unit, KU Leuven
  2. 2. EMBED as a strategic partnership During a period of three years (2017-2020) experts in the field of quality assurance, online and blended learning work closely together to achieve different objectives related to the introduction and sustainable implementation of Blended Education
  3. 3. Purposes of EMBED • Track and map BL practices, conditions, strategies and policies in a systematic manner • Assess the degree of maturity of BL in HEIs • Provide a framework for enabling optimization or change to achieve up-scaled quality BL programs and courses
  4. 4. Working towards a maturity model 1. Literature study 2. Repository of BL cases (mainly BL courses), interviews with lecturers, course designers and policy makers 3. Interviews BL experts, outside the EMBED project (Delphi study) o Framing blended learning, teaching and education o Define & refine dimensions and criteria of the MM o Describe maturity levels 4. Follow-up: revision/validation, multiplier events, MOOC
  5. 5. 1. Blended learning: learning as a result of a deliberate, integrated combination of online and face-to-face learning activities. 2. Blended teaching: designing and facilitating blended learning activities. 3. Blended education: the formal context of BL (practices) that is determined by policies and conditions with regard to the organization and support of blended learning. Definitions in the EMBED project Goeman, K., Poelmans, S., Van Rompaey, V. (2018). Framing Blended Learning, Teaching and Education. In: ICERI2018 Proceedings, (1676-1680). Presented at the International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation, Sevilla, 12 Nov 2018-14 Nov 2018.
  6. 6. Definitions in the EMBED project 1. Deliberate: Outcome-oriented: • Micro level: activating students, non-rote learning, dealing with large groups, student satisfaction, …. • Meso level: cost-benefits, targeting certain student groups, reducing drop-out rates, increasing pass rates, flexibility, accessibility, ….. 2. Integrated combination: A contextualized logic for learning using a blend of virtual and physical spaces. ‘Blended learning refers to a deliberate, integrated combination of online and face-to-face learning activities’
  7. 7. IMPORTANCE OF EVIDENCE, EXPERIENCE AND Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) - When backed up by research and/or previous experience a course or program design is reinforced. - The extent to which CQI processes and monitoring are embedded in a course or program, determines the maturity level of a BL approach. - These allow course instructors/designers to continuously improve BL courses in an iterative manner MATURITY concept relates to the degree of formality and optimization of the design, evidence-based decision making, documentation and continuous quality improvement ACTION LEVEL AND KEY ACTORS - Three action levels : the micro, meso and macro level. - Main actors are: instructor or instructional designer & students (micro), teams for decision making (program coordinators and heads of teaching and learning centers (meso)) Assumptions
  8. 8. • Course design process – Selection of blended learning activities and their sequence – Selection of blended learning tools and technology • Course flexibility Course interaction Course experience – Student learning – Study load – Inclusiveness Micro – Dimensions and criteria
  9. 9. Existing frameworks - Graham & Woodfield - Strategy - Structure - Support - E-learning Maturity Model - E-xcellence (EADTU) - Quality score cards for BL - … Meso – Dimensions and criteria : • Programme design process – Programme coherence – Alignment and coherence of blended learning tools • Programme flexibility • Programme experience – Student learning – Study load – Inclusiveness Institutional level • Institutional support • Institutional strategy • Sharing and openness • Professional development • Quality assurance • Governance • Finances • Facilities
  10. 10. Micro level: BL PRACTICES IN CONTEXT Sample Overview (N=26 cases ) 6 Embed partner universities • Humanities 7 (philosopy, linguistics, cultural studies, psychology) • (Business) Economics & Information Management 6 • Exact Sciences & Research Methods 10 • Medical Sciences 3 Interviews with lecturers and an online survey (frequency of learning activities and tools)
  11. 11. General Learning activities General Activities N Online Offline Online & Offline Instructor-led Student-led Lectures/Tutorials 24 19 21 15 23 3 Exercises / Assignments / Problem Solving 21 18 12 10 8 12 Small Group Work 14 10 11 7 1 9 Workshops // Seminars 13 7 9 4 4 6 Student generated content (e.g. Video's, articles, ….) 12 12 2 2 3 6 Student Presentation 11 7 8 4 1 7 Reflective journal 10 10 0 0 1 8 Panel/ Discusion /Debates 10 7 8 5 2 7 Demonstrations 9 6 7 4 6 2 Q&A sessions 8 4 6 2 4 1 Guest Lectures 6 4 3 1 4 0 Polling // Surveys 6 3 3 1 5 0 Project 6 5 2 1 0 4 Brainstorming 5 4 4 3 1 4 Labs/Practicum 5 2 4 1 0 1 MInd--mapping 5 3 4 2 0 4 Role play // Simulation 4 0 5 0 3 3 Excursions 2 0 2 0 0 1
  12. 12. Communication & Evaluation Activities Communication Activities N Online Offline On & Off Instructor -led Student -led Announcements 22 22 11 11 21 1 Consultations (office, online, ...) 16 12 12 8 5 5 Notifications 16 16 3 3 15 1 Discussion session/forum 21 20 8 7 8 13 Evaluation Activities NR Online Offline On & Off instructor -led Student - led Feedback 17 15 9 7 11 5 Final Exam 17 5 15 3 16 1 Other student-generated contents (Blogs, reflective journals, Website,..) 16 2 4 0 0 11 Peer Review 13 11 7 5 2 11 Essay 9 6 4 1 5 3 Commenting on readings / annotations 7 7 1 1 0 3 Portfolio 7 7 0 0 3 4 Marking with Feedback 7 6 2 1 7 0 Quiz 6 5 1 0 6 2 Project 6 4 3 2 1 3 Final Presentation 5 3 3 1 0 4 Product Development 4 4 2 2 0 4 Mid-semester Exam 4 2 3 1 4 0 Clicker Evaluation 3 3 0 0 3 0 Report 2 2 0 0 0 2 Poster 2 1 1 0 0 2 Mid-semester Presentation 0 0 0 0 0 0
  13. 13. Tools & Resources Tool name N In a few activities half of the activities most activities all activities PPT slides 21 5 5 7 6 Weblinks 18 4 6 4 5 Readings 17 2 3 6 6 Textbooks 13 3 2 5 2 Recorded Lectures 12 3 5 2 1 Aynchronous Discussion (individual or group) 12 5 3 3 0 Handouts/ Lecture notes 9 5 3 1 2 Desktop recordings (such as screencasts) 9 2 6 1 0 Smart Device 8 2 2 1 3 Unit outline / Learning Guide 8 1 0 1 5 Web Course Platforms 8 0 1 3 4 Blog (Individual or group) 8 0 4 0 1 Synchronous video/audio chat (e.g. Skype) 8 5 1 0 0 Office Tools 7 0 2 3 2 OER 6 0 2 1 3 Authoring tools 5 3 0 2 0 Learning Analytics 5 4 1 0 0 Subject Specific Software 4 1 1 1 1 Wiki (Individual or group) 4 4 0 0 0 Webinars 4 2 1 0 0 Social Media 4 0 2 1 0 News & Curation Tools 3 0 1 0 2 Personal Information Systems (e.g. Evernote, OneNote,…) 3 1 0 2 0 Live Streaming of Lectures 3 2 1 0 0 PPT with audio 3 3 0 0 0 Interactive Textbook 2 0 2 0 0 Recorded Webinars 2 1 0 0 0
  14. 14. BL PRACTICES Thematic Analyses Drivers & Enablers Individual drivers Internal Institutional drivers External drivers
  15. 15. BLENDED EDUCATION CONTEXT – Drivers • Individual drivers: • Enrich the learning experience: • Focus on problem solving • Focus on authentic cases • Supporting engagement and building a community outside of the classroom “For 25 years I have been trying to find ways of helping students with turning theory into conceptual thinking and into problem solving” “To free up class time and try to replace that for conceptual thinking” • More interactive teaching “[until now the normal way of teaching] was the teacher standing up at the blackboard … and the students sitting in the chairs… so we want to change that form of teaching into a …. more interactive form of education.”
  16. 16. BLENDED EDUCATION CONTEXT – Drivers • Individual drivers: • Skills for the students’ future careers • They should learn to work in a team and collaborate (outside the classroom) • Students need to learn how to use various tools • They need to learn to search for reliable information • They need to learn to apply theories in practice • Flexibility & internationalization • Reaching International students or students living far from the campus • Reaching students with certain disabilities or a different educational context • Personal interests • Experimenting with tools, new ways of teaching • Doing research on teaching methods
  17. 17. BLENDED EDUCATION CONTEXT – Drivers • Internal institutional drivers : • Improve success rate “So 70% of the influx [should] obtain their bachelor’s degree within four years, that was more or less the main goal” • University-level strategy “There is a strong hint [from our university] that things should be blended, or online” “The one big driver was the university statement, I think 2 years ago, that they would expect all students to have the opportunity to take at least one fully online course.” • External drivers : • Requirements: • The need to reach international students before the course starts on-campus • Managing assignments for large groups of students , peer reviews, …
  18. 18. BLENDED EDUCATION CONTEXT – Enablers Enablers (THAT WORK) • Support in the development of online materials, e.g. videos • Funding from various sources, e.g. from faculty • Extra staff, e.g. teaching assistants • Follow-up, e.g. sharing experiences with colleagues • Technical, either centralized or faculty- based help desks • Project-oriented approach within a design team (>< ’find your way’) • Time for development • Peer pressure • …
  19. 19. BLENDED EDUCATION CONTEXT – Laurillard’s Model Laurillard, D. (2014). Thinking about blended learning A paper for the Thinkers in Residence programme, (December), 1–26.
  20. 20. SOME CHALLENGES & FUTURE TRENDS - Applying learning analytics on a more advanced level - Recommender systems - Predictive next to descriptive analytics - …. - Inserting adaptivity in a BL approach - E.g. “So more basic exercises for the ones who need it. And then more challenging for the ones who can handle that…”. - E.g. “It would be wise [to do it like this:] ‘This is the minimum that you have to do and this is the exam for that. And you get a six or a seven. No more. But if you’re willing to take up a challenge, this is the target exam for an eight. And if you really want to be challenged, there’s a third exam. I think it would help them. ‘ “ - Dealing with very large groups (e.g. + 400 students) - ‘MOOC style’ teaching - …
  21. 21. Don’t fall into the trap of thinking that if you make the material crisp and clear, as nice as you can, that all your problems are gone. Be very sensitive of whether the material is not too good, so that your students have the impression that they understand that, they did understand the story but they don’t understand the concept. I think it's worthwhile doing so. But they have to be aware that it will cost time. It will not save you time. It will probably increase the efficiency of the course, but it will not save you time as a lecturer. Don’t make everything blended … And so the good things from the past, the good old lectures : keep them ! And next to this, do things with a team ! A team of 2 or 3 is enough. And then you have to go for it, mind the details, the quality of audio and video, appointments with students, a study guide. Choose your pet project and go for quality and detail. _ instructors

×