Abstract
This is an introspective account of the author’s lived
experience in facilitating web-conference (using software
Live Meeting), hybrid, pure online, and face to face (f2f )
with web-enhanced four delivery methods for 4 courses of
Sociology, Diversity, Developmental Psychology, and
Contemporary American Society in the spring semester of
2009. The dynamics of coordinating and adjusting
structures and functions of each learning environment
among the author, students, IT department, and
administration policy illustrates the challenges of both non-
instructional and instructional issues situated in a highly
contextualized setting.

Research Purpose
This case study intends to highlight a lived experience to bridge
research and practice within a unique context where teaching 18 to 21
credit loads (an average of 7 classes) per semester is the norm, making
scholarly research challenging.
Besides, it also addressed some concerns, such as the emerging
participatory technologies creating a new generation of learners who are
familiar with the anytime, anywhere, and anyhow, as well as “any-what”
learning style and demands, in addition to the economic uncertainty that
reflects in educational budgetary constraints demanding more versatile
and accountable in the teaching enterprise.

At the individual level, this paper examines issues
from the instructional perspective to obtain first-hand
experience to highlight 2-year college scholarship issues.
It also surveyed the author’s navigation among different
instructional strategies ( e.g., across pedagogy,
andragogy, and heutagogy) between constructivism and
instructionism.
At the institutional level, the author also explored
issues from the non-instructional perspective to illustrate
the dynamics among the instructor, students, IT
Department, and administration’s anticipated learning
technologies to provide accessibility and efficiency.

At the individual level, this paper examines issues
from the instructional perspective to obtain first-hand
experience to highlight 2-year college scholarship issues.
It also surveyed the author’s navigation among different
instructional strategies ( e.g., across pedagogy,
andragogy, and heutagogy) between constructivism and
instructionism.
At the institutional level, the author also explored
issues from the non-instructional perspective to illustrate
the dynamics among the instructor, students, IT
Department, and administration’s anticipated learning
technologies to provide accessibility and efficiency.

Method and Procedures
The method applied in this introspective paper was an
auto-ethnographical case study. The “situated
experiential teaching” were documented in the daily and
weekly class logs for each delivery format.
There were 3 stages of construction described as
follows:

Constructing the Basic Research Conditions and Procedures
Prior to implementing the multiple delivery formats :
organizing the non-instructional resources -
1. Understanding school’s policy and concerns regarding
delivery formats
2. Participating in relevant professional and curricular
development projects and software learning processes
3. Constructing a sound technical supporting network

Constructing the Basic Research Conditions and Procedures
During implementing multiple delivery formats : Constructing the instructional process and
assess products -
1. Constructing collaborative wikiblog for learners’ participation and reference.( e.g.,
http://cvtcsocialscience.wetpaint.com )
2. Construct experiential teaching Resources-Based websites for personal usage.(e.g.,
http://cvtcscholarship.wetpaint.com )
3. Informing incoming students and gather basic demographic information and technical
skills.
4. Discerning student prior knowledge on subject matters and technical skills.
5. Documenting teaching and learning activities in class logs on daily and weekly basis for
each delivery format (e.g., in the above wikiblog and BlackBoard master copy archive).
6. Designing and implementing cyclical (3-5 weeks) teaching and learning conditions and
assessing specific pedagogical/andragogical issues in each cycle from the instructor
designed feedback system.
7. Redesigning the teaching and learning environment and beginning another new cycle.

At the end of the whole cycle of the multiple
delivery formats -
Analyzing the class logs and communication
Documents among the instructor and the relevant
administrators.

Instrumentations: 1. Learner’s Basic Demographic Info
Age: average 26
Gender: Male 31%; Female 69%
First generation attending college: 46%
Employment: Part time 30%; Full time 30%;
40% unemployed
Class: Low income households 50%
Sample size: Randomly selected one from 6
classes during spring 2009, which was
Developmental Psy with an enrollment of 25
students

Instrumentations: 2. PALS Teaching Style – Self Report

Instrumentations: 2. PALS Teaching Style – Self Report
Test Result:
46
33
30
12
15
16
19
171

Instrumentations: 3. Self Report of Satisfaction of
the Interface between Pedagogies and Delivery Formats
Results:
The satisfactory
level (5 points is
the most
satisfactory,
and 1 the least):
• 5- Face to face
• 4- Online
• 3- Hybrid
• (2- ITV)
• 1-Webconference

• Enhancing self efficacy.
• Being aware of technological affordances in each environment.
• Being adaptive to the pedagogical adjustments within and between different
delivery formats.
• Being responsive to diverse students’ characteristics and learning needs in
different formats.
• Being able in evaluating hardware and software capacities and limitations.
• Being at ease to integrate contents, pedagogies and technology.
• Creating opportunities to network with IT department and relevant
administrators.
• Being a better problem solver.
• Being a part of change agent team.

• : it is not a popular journey because
not many faculty members choose to deliver multiple
methods. Thus the community of practice is inadequate for
further professional development via the wisdom of the
crowd.
• : expose my idiosyncrasy in certain
delivery format, such as the audio web-conference which
does not manifest my pedagogical strength.
• : the emphasis on
teaching with an average of 21 credits or 7 class teaching
loads leads to tremendous difficulties to conduct research.

Suggestions for future research:
1. To what extent is it necessary to promote research and practice
on multiple deliver formats?
2. Under what kind of environment, can multiple delivery formats
be promoted?
3. What are the measurements of effectiveness and efficiency in
learning outcomes generated from multiple delivery formats?