An overview of preliminary research evaluating students in face-to-face, blended, and online Korean classrooms.

1. A Blended Korean
Classroom: DoStudent
MinutesOnlineAffect
FinalGrades?
BrighamYoung University
247 E 3200 N Provo UT, 84606

2. Traditional Web
facilitated
Blended/
Hybrid
Online
(Distance)
Online
Percentage
0 % 1 to 29 % 30 to 79 % 80+ %
Characteristics  No
significant
online use
 Content is
written or
oral
 Uses
technology
for webpages,
syllabus,
assignment,
etc.
 Online +
Face to
face
delivery
 Online
discussion
 Reduced
number of
classroom
meetings
 Most to all
content
delivered
online
 No in-
person
meetings

3. Student
Opinion on
Blended
Learning
A 2011 survey administered to 2,000
students from 17 higher education
institutions asked:
“Would you like to see institutions expand
the use of blended learning?”
Eighty-four percent answered, “yes.”
(http://echo360.com, “The StudentView of Blended Learning” 2010)

4. Three
Korean 101
classes
1. Traditional (30 students)/Blended (37)/online
(26)
2. Students were taught by the same professor
3. Five grades were compared:
(Quizzes, ChapterTests, Midterm, Final Exam,
Final Grades)
4. Total time spent online was compared with
the final grade in the class

5. Traditional classroom Blended classroom Online class (Distance)
M-F 1hr/class Th class online (MTWF in
class)
Student works at own pace
TTh professor instruction T professor instruction Online meetings withTA
(roughly weekly)
1 chapter/2 weeks 1 chapter/2 weeks 1 year to complete
No online resources Pre-recorded lectures and
media presentations
required
Pre-recorded lectures and
media presentations
required
In class quizzes, tests, etc. Quizzes and tests online Online tests and quizzes.
Proctored final
OptionalTA office
hours/speaking
appointments
Required online speaking
appointments
Required online speaking
appointments

6. Results-
Class
Averages
for
Three
Courses
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Traditional Blended Distance
Class Score
Quiz Score
Chapter Test
Midterm
Final

7. Results in
numbers
Overall
course
grade
Quiz
scores
Chapter
tests
Midterm Final
Traditional
93.5 99 95
95
(proctored)
81
(proctored)
Blended
93.6 99.31 88.67
95
(proctored)
82
(proctored)
Online
(distance)
92.6 98.22 97.9
97
(not proctored)
79.8
(proctored)

8. Results
-Time spent
online and
final grade
in blended
class
Correlation: 0.61

9. Results
-Time spent
online and
final grade
in online
class 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
86 88 90 92 94 96 98 100
TotalTimeSpentOnline
Final Grade
TotalTime and Final Grade Correlation
Student

10. Total
average
time spent
online
Blended
3 hours 9
minutes
(Compared to 15
hours if in class on
Thursdays)
Online
44 hours 36
minutes
(75 hours if in
class daily)

11. Student
evaluations
ofCourse
and teacher
101
Online
101
Blended
101
F2F
102
Online
102
Blended
102
F2F
Course
8.9
6.8 7.1 8.0 6.7 7.3
Teacher
6.9
6.3 7.0 7.0 6.9 7.4

12. Typical
student
comments
(Blended)
Positive Blended
Comments
Negative Blended
Comments
1. Lots of support material
online
2. Convenient to meet with
TA online
3. Multiple choice quizzes
were easy
4. Nice to not have
Thursday class
1. Two web sites with two
sets of grades
2. Multiple choice tests
didn’t help students
learn.
3. Students didn’t get to
meet with professor
enough. Class run by
undergrad.TAs.
4. Glitches in the system

13. Typical
student
comments
(Online)
Positive Online
Comments
Negative Online
Comments
1. Lots of support material
online
2. Convenient and flexible
3. Live interactions
provided help and
support
4. Would definitely
recommend to a friend
1. Glitches in the system;
sometimes system was
down
2. Almost too flexible;
needed help staying on
track

14. Conclusion
1. Time spent online had a positive
correlation with overall grade
2. Course grade for each class was similar
3. Students in traditional classroom
appeared to spend more observable
time with class material (tests, quizzes,
slides, etc.)
4. Student evaluations were slightly lower
for blended classes

15. Concerns
with
blended/
online
learning
Questions for
further
research
1. “Binge” studying (can be
controlled)
2. Non-proctored tests and quizzes
(once proctored, scores dropped)
3. Limited interaction of professor &
student
Further research:
oral proficiency in
traditional/online/blended

16. Tell us about
your blended
experiences
We would love to hear about your experiences!
 Julie Damron: Julie_damron@byu.edu
 Jennifer Quinlan: jennifer.Quinlan@byu.edu

17. References
 References
 ADFL Guidelines on the Administration of Foreign Language Departments. (2014, January 1). Retrieved from
http://www.adfl.org/resources/index_online.htm
 Allen, I., & Seaman, J. (2013). Changing Course: Ten Years of Tracking Online Education in the United States - OLC. Retrieved April 6,
2015.
 Benefits of Blended Learning. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://blended.online.ucf.edu/about/benefits-of-blended-learning/
 Blended Learning Model Definitions. (2012, January 1). Retrieved from http://www.christenseninstitute.org/blended-learning-
definitions-and-models/
 Center for Digital Education. (2012). Realizing the Full Potential of Blended Learning. Retrieved April 6, 2015. Retrieved from
http://echo360.com/sites/default/files/CDE12%20STRATEGY%20Echo360-V.pdf
 Elvers, G., Polzella, D., & Graetz, K. (2003). Procrastination in Online Courses: Performance and Attitudinal Differences. Teaching of
Psychology, 30(2), 159-162. Retrieved from http://www.anitacrawley.net/Articles/elversAttitudinalDifference.pdf
 Hill, P. (2013, February 26). The Most Thorough Summary (to date) of MOOC Completion Rates. Retrieved from
http://mfeldstein.com/the-most-thorough-summary-to-date-of-mooc-completion-rates/
 Ho, A., & Lu, L. (2006). Testing the reluctant professor's hypothesis: Evaluating a blended-learning approach to distance
education. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 12(1), 81-102. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/40215727.pdf?acceptTC=true
 Is Blended Learning the Best of Both Worlds? (2013, January 17). Retrieved from
https://onlinelearninginsights.wordpress.com/2013/01/17/is-blended-learning-the-best-of-both-worlds/
 Rovai, A., & Jordan, H. (2004). Blended Learning and Sense of Community: A comparative analysis with traditional and fully online
graduate courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 5(2). Retrieved from
http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/viewArticle/192/274
 The Student View of Blended Learning. (2011, January 1). Retrieved from
http://www.ecsu.edu/academics/offices/distanceeducation/docs/studentViewBlendedLearning.pdf
 Suppes, P., & Morningstar, M. (1969). Computer-Assisted Instruction. Science, 166, 343-350. Retrieved from https://suppes-
corpus.stanford.edu
 Sheehy, K. (2013, January 8). Online Course Enrollment Climbs for 10th Straight Year. Retrieved from
http://www.usnews.com/education/online-education/articles/2013/01/08/online-course-enrollment-climbs-for-10th-straight-year
 Understanding the “Spacing Effect”. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.knowledgefactor.com/sites/default/files/The Spacing Effect.pdf