Descriptive Case Study of HyFlex Learning EnvironmentCase Study- Michael Koskinen Northeastern University Doctorate of Education Program

1. Understanding the Needs of Adult Graduate Students:
A Descriptive Case Study of a HyFlex Learning Environment
Michael Koskinen
1

2. Statement of the Problem
Adult students have more responsibilities (as opposed to students pursuing a degree
straight from high school) that prevent them from attending a traditional course (Cercone,
2008).
Face-to-face, hybrid, blended, and online learning have all provided students flexibility in
how they consume course content. However it does not provide student choice. These
courses are constructed in a manner where the instructor dictates how the student is to
learn.
2

3. Statement Continued
There is a belief that flexible methods of learning may improve student success (Guest,
2005). Kyei-Blankson, Godwyll, and Nur-Awaleh (2014) believe that offering flexible
modalities match the needs, learning styles, and personal circumstances of students.
Students today should be able to take a course and choose whether they are consuming the
material online or face-to-face. This type of flexible learning provides control to adult
students in their learning, which is an important tenet of adult learning theory (Knowles
1984; Herbold, 2012).
3

4. Adult Students
Research shows that adult students that are given control over their learning have higher
satisfaction and are more motivated to learn (Motycka, Onge, and Williams, 2013).
Malcolm S. Knowles introduced the concept arguing that adults learn differently (Herbold,
2012). His work constitutes creation of adult learning theory.
Research that suggests that online students are working adults who need flexibility in their
learning (Pallof and Pratt, 2001; Cross, 1981). In addition, adult students prefer to make
their own decisions and actions to accomplish learning (Herbold, 2012); these adults prefer
to be more involved in the learning process (2012).
4

5. Online Learning
Adult students have more responsibilities that prevent them from attending a traditional
class (Cercone, 2008)
Adult students require more attention in online learning (Gilmore & Lyons, 2012) than
other face-to-face students.
Many adult students are very unfamiliar with online learning. Most adults remember
learning in the traditional, instructor-led environment that happens face-to-face; this is
what most adult students have experienced and what they recall about higher education
(Cercone, 2008).
5

6. Online Learning
One recommendation for developing online courses is to provide choices and options
(Herbold, 2012). The more options that are available, the more students feel in control of
their learning. Research shows that courses designed for adult students are more strongly
recommended by students than courses that are not designed in such a fashion (2012).
6

7. HyFlex
One of the concerns with blended learning is that there is no direction for how a blended learning
course should be developed (Garrison and Vaughan, 2008; Fleck, 2012).
HyFlex learning is an modified version of blended or hybrid instruction.
Developed by Dr. Brian Beatty (Beatty, 2010).
One of the main benefits for HyFlex courses is that they allow students to choose how they wish to
attend class each session (Abdelmalak et al, 2016; Miller et al., 2013).
7

8. HyFlex Framework
Beatty implemented HyFlex learning in graduate courses at San Francisco State University (Abdelmalak, Kharga, and Parra,
2016). Beatty’s framework of HyFlex features four principles:
1. HyFlex is the ability for students to have choice (Lakhal and Khechine, 2016) (Kyei-Blankson and Godwyll, 2010)
(Abdelmalak, Kharga, and Parra, 2016).
2. Equivalency of all learning activates, regardless of format (Abdelmalak, Kharga, and Parra, 2016).
3. Reusability of all activities, lectures, and multimedia in the class for all students (2016).
4. Accessibility of all students to have the technology skills to access all methods of delivery (2016) (Miller et al., 2013).
8

9. Purpose of Study
The purpose of this qualitative study is to understand the experiences of adult learners in a
HyFlex (flexible) learning environment in order to understand if this environment better
meets the needs of adult learners in higher education.
9

10. Significance of Research Problem
While many courses today do offer synchronous components, online learning typically has
been a passive event. It is difficult to build community (Vesley, Bloom, & Sherlock, 2007)
in the course. Online courses can be a lonely, isolated experience. Many online classes are
asynchronous and sometimes students find themselves disengaged with the course
material.
It is also critical to find new ways to engage with adult learners. Today’s students have
many personal responsibilities and flexibility in educational opportunities can help to meet
that demand.
10

11. Research Questions
Central Questions:
• How do adult graduate students participating in a HyFlex course describe the benefits and drawbacks of a
HyFlex model?
Sub Questions:
• How do adult students decide to participate in a HyFlex course?
• How do adult graduate students self-direct and involve themselves in their learning in a HyFlex course
environment?
• How does the course design help or hinder adult graduate students in a HyFlex course?
11

12. Theoretical Framework: Andragogy
Malcolm Knowles (1984) a seminal author of andragogy: adult learning theory.
Based on the concepts that adult students are self-directed and the teacher is the facilitator
rather than a presenter of content.
12

13. Andragogy Continued
Malcolm Knowles (1984) labeled four main principles of adult learning:
1) Adults should be involved in the planning of their learning.
2) Adult experience provides a basis for learning.
3) Adults are most interested when the content is related to their life.
4) Adult learning is focused on problem solving rather than content.
13

14. Research Procedures
Three 15-week graduate or upper class undergraduate courses using HyFlex for
instruction. Students from three different HyFlex courses were interviewed for a total of
eight. Interviewed students were selected by their frequency of using the HyFlex model
with the synchronous and asynchronous options.
Participants were adult students participating in a HyFlex course.
Students were recruited to interview from deploying web based survey and in-class
announcement.
14

15. Background of Participants
Eight students across three graduate HyFlex courses:
● Pharmaceutical Engineering Fundamentals
● Network Services Administration
● IT Service Management
15

16. 16

17. 17

18. Findings Q1
How do adult graduate students participating in a HyFlex course describe the benefits and drawbacks of a HyFlex model?
● Flexibility of format
○ Every participant enjoyed the flexibility of HyFlex
○ “ I really love the flexibility that the class offers, how we can make that decision five minutes before the class whether
we want to be online or in person.”
● Issues with communicating with distance students
○ Participants found it to be harder to have interactions with non-physically present classmates
○ “If I had to call a weakness specifically in as far as the format is concerned, I would like to bring the conversation back
to those students who I've never really seen that are always in the online sessions.”
● Preference of HyFlex in comparison to online or hybrid courses
○ Participants noted that a HyFlex course has all the benefits of online and face-to-face courses and more flexibility in
comparison.
● Issues with technology
○ Some participants noted audio issues in one of their classes and that it was difficult to see synchronous students.
18

19. Finding Q2
How do adult students decide to participate in a HyFlex course?
● Attendance preferences
○ 7 out of 8 participants preferred coming face-to-face when they could.
○ Value added when attending class.
○ “I'm thinking what I'm looking for out of the whole experience, as far as being present in the classroom, is that hands-on,
face-to-face interaction with the professor.”
● Perspectives of online learning
○ Attendance preferences influenced by negative perceptions of online courses.
○ “I'm not a fan on 100% online classes, especially in the fashion where it's, Here's a video. Watch it on your own leisure,
then I'll meet you when you take the exam.”
● Personal responsibilities
○ Attendance was affected by their professional/personal lives
○ “Sometimes my babysitter, who's also a college student can't make it or something’s happening…they have an exam,
whatever, you know. And, I'm stuck, I'm trying to figure out, ‘Oh crap, how am I gonna get to class tonight?’ So, I've
experienced those situations.”
19

20. Finding Q3
How do adult graduate students self-direct and involve themselves in their learning in a HyFlex course environment?
● Student engagement in building community
○ Participants overall felt it was easier to built community in class than with their peers who are not
present.
○ “Sometimes the conversations we share in our downtime is important. Like, I learned a lot from the
other students.”
● Self-motivation to learn
○ Students were motivated to learn on their own without instructor prompting
○ “Early on, a couple of us talked and were trying to create study sessions. We have an open WhatsApp communication.
We have a number of people on there. Several of them I see and I recognize.”
20

21. Finding Q4
How does the course design help or hinder adult graduate students in a HyFlex course?
● Importance of instructor engagement
○ Participants found that instructors who did a traditional lecture would find little engagement from non-present students.
○ “It was minimal to where the professor would ask questions to the students, but once again, I maybe witnessed one time
a student asked a question and the professor would definitely take the time to answer the question back, but if the student
didn't ask the question, it was very rare for him to even ask.”
● Use of lecture recordings
○ Participants found the lecture recordings to be very useful and an important part of HyFlex
○ “I would listen to the material that he provided in Moodle for that week, which is probably a class he did last year. But it
covers the same topics. So I would listen to that and then he references the chapters that you need to read to complement
what he's teaching.”
21

22. Discussion of Research Findings
● Students appreciate HyFlex but most prefer coming to class
○ Having the option and power to choose their own learning path is important
● Students had negative experiences with online classes that affected their attendance
○ Because of negative perceptions of online courses participants found more value in physical presence
○ It is easier to communicate and build community in a face-to-face environment
● Flexibility is the biggest benefit of HyFlex
● Students prefer HyFlex to other course modalities
○ If given a choice HyFlex is preferred over online or hybrid courses
● Issues with technology
○ Technology must be accessible and easy to use for instructors
22

23. Discussion of Research Findings Continued
● Students and Classroom Community
○ HyFlex courses include the flexibility of online courses. But also include the face-to-face elements that many students
seek.
○ Lack of engagement of non-physically present students is a concern. This creates a different learning experience.
● Instructor training is important for teachers to understand HyFlex
○ Instructors who simply lecture or do not involve non-physically present students hurt engagement
○ Teacher training is important in HyFlex
○ All course content should be accessible regardless of attendance preference
23

24. Discussion of Results in Relation to Andragogy
HyFlex aligns within the framework on andragogy.
Participants enjoyed coming to class, but appreciated the control they had over
their own learning. This is a key tenet of andragogy.
Participants self-directed their learning. They formed their own learning
communities using social media tools and worked with their peers outside of the
classroom. This included students of any attendance method.
24

25. Recommendations for Practice
● Find New Ways To Engage With Adult Learners
○ Offer more opportunities for face-to-face interactions for online programs
■ Research suggests that adult students want meaningful interactions that are face-to-face. Higher
education graduate programs are growing in online only, but this does not meet the needs of all
students.
○ Provide flexible learning opportunities beyond online courses
■ Adult students want more than just online courses. Flexible course formats can extend beyond
just online classes.
● Design courses with HyFlex in mind
○ HyFlex courses should be designed as online courses
■ Accessible content is important in HyFlex. Courses designed as face-to-face instruction with
online components added are not as effective.
○ HyFlex courses must be designed with classroom community in mind
■ Regular interactions between all attendance methods is critical
25

26. Limitations of Study
● Small Sample Size
● Single Case Study
○ Data collection at one institution
● Research bias
○ Researcher is familiar with the site for the study and personal knowledge of courses taught using HyFlex
● Student predefined preferences
● Some of the participants in the study were a mix of students in online and face-to-face
graduate programs
26

27. Further Research
In comparison to other instructional methods there has been little research conducted and
much smaller name recognition for HyFlex among the higher education community.
Further research should explore HyFlex from the instructor experience. Course design can
be more complex with HyFlex and understanding the best practices of instructor
methodology can expand the body of literature for HyFlex.
Other studies in student performance in comparison to student attendance preference
should also be explored.
27

28. Conclusion
HyFlex courses are one way to meet the growing needs for higher education to
provide modern learning experiences without moving to a fully online modality.
Institutions would be wise to explore opportunities such as HyFlex to help leverage needs
and desires of adult graduate students.
28

29. References
Beatty, B. (2010). Hybrid courses with flexible participation – the HyFlex design. Draft v2.2. Retrieved from
http://itec.sfsu.edu/hyflex/hyflex_course_design_theory_2.2.pdf
Cercone, K. (2008). Characteristics of adult learners with implications for online learning design. AACE Journal, 16(2), 137–159.
Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2008). Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles, and guidelines. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Gilmore, M., & Lyons, E. M. (2012). NURSING 911: An orientation program to improve retention of online RN-BSN students. Nursing Education Perspectives,
33(1), 45-47.
Guest, R. (2005). Will flexible learning raise student achievement? Education Economics, 13(3), 287-297.
Herbold, J. (2012). Curriculum mapping and research-based practice: Helping students find the path to full potential. Odyssey: New Directions in Deaf Education,
13(1), 40-43.
Jumani, N. B., & Rehman, F. (2011). Educational technology landscape - a Pakistani scene. International Journal of Academic Research, 3(3), 757-765.
Lakhal, S., & Khechine, H. (2016). Student intention to use desktop web-conferencing according to course delivery modes in higher education. The International
Journal of Management Education, 14(2), 146-160. 29

30. Lee, Y. (2011). A case study on the effect of teaching innovation on learning effectiveness: Using a moderator of "integrating information technology into
teaching." The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning, 7(1), 1-14.
Kyei-Blankson, L., Godwyll, F., & Nur-Awaleh, M. A. (2014). Innovative blended delivery and learning: Exploring student choice, experience, and level of
satisfaction in a hyflex course. International Journal of Innovation and Learning, 16(3), 243-252.
Knowles, M., & Associates. (1984). Andragogy in action. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc.
Motycka, C., Onge, E. & Williams, J. (2013). Asynchronous versus synchronous learning in pharmacy education. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching. 2. .
Seidman, I. (2006). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and the social sciences. New York: Teachers College Press.
Tucker, C. (2012). Common core standards: Transforming teaching with collaborative technology. Teacher Librarian, 40(1), 30-37.
30

31. Jumani, N. B., & Rehman, F. (2011). Educational technology landscape - a Pakistani scene. International Journal of Academic Research, 3(3), 757-765.
Lakhal, S., & Khechine, H. (2016). Student intention to use desktop web-conferencing according to course delivery modes in higher education. The International
Journal of Management Education, 14(2), 146-160.
Lee, Y. (2011). A case study on the effect of teaching innovation on learning effectiveness: Using a moderator of "integrating information technology into
teaching." The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning, 7(1), 1-14.
Kyei-Blankson, L., Godwyll, F., & Nur-Awaleh, M. A. (2014). Innovative blended delivery and learning: Exploring student choice, experience, and level of
satisfaction in a hyflex course. International Journal of Innovation and Learning, 16(3), 243-252.
Knowles, M., & Associates. (1984). Andragogy in action. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc.
Motycka, C., Onge, E. & Williams, J. (2013). Asynchronous versus synchronous learning in pharmacy education. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching. 2. .
31

32. Seidman, I. (2006). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and the social sciences. New York: Teachers College Press.
Tucker, C. (2012). Common core standards: Transforming teaching with collaborative technology. Teacher Librarian, 40(1), 30-37.
Vesely, P., Bloom, L., & Sherlock, J. (2007). Key elements of building online community: Comparing faculty and student perceptions. MERLOT Journal of
Online Learning and Teaching, 3(3).
Wright, C. (2001) Children and technology: issues, challenges, and opportunities. Childhood Education, 78(1), 37-41.
Wlodkowski, R. J. (1999). Motivation and diversity: A Frame for Teaching. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 78, 7-16.
Yazan, B. (2015). Three Approaches to Case Study Methods in Education: Yin, Merriam, and Stake. The Qualitative Report, 20(2), 134-152.
Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, Inc.
32