Presentation by Stephan Poelmans, KU Leuven on EMBED, during the EMBED Launch in Edinburgh on 2 September 2019.

1. Stephan Poelmans, KU Leuven, Stephan.Poelmans@kuleuven.be
Faculty of Economics and Business
LIRIS research group

2. EMBED as a strategic partnership

3. Purposes of EMBED
• Track 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

5. 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

6. 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

7. VALUE OF EVIDENCE, EXPERIENCE AND Continuous Quality Improvement
(CQI)
- When backed up by research and/or practical evidence a course or
program design is reinforced.
- The extent to which CQI processes and products 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
ACTION LEVEL AND KEY ACTORS
- Three action levels : the micro, meso and macro level.
- Main actors are: instructor or instructional designer & students (micro),
teams or bodies for decision making a.o. program coordinators and heads of
teaching and learning centers (meso)
MATURITY concept relates to the degree of formality and optimization of
the design, evidence-based decision making, documentation and
continuous quality improvement
Assumptions

8. 1. BL course design process planning and
design of a course structure
2. BL community and instructor presence
extent and types of individual and group
interactions during BL activities, focused on
LC building
3. Variety of BL materials in order to facilitate
content – communication – construction
learnig activities
4. Personalization and learner control extent
to which learners are able to modify or
control particular features of the BLE to
their individual needs
5. Re-usability, sharing and openness of BL
course degree to which a BL course is
shared and/or can be (re-)used
6. Studiability balance between study load,
learner experiences and achievement of
educational objectives
Micro –
Dimensions and criteria

9. Existing frameworks
- Graham & Woodfield
- Strategy
- Structure
- Support
- E-learning Maturity Model
- E-xcellence (EADTU)
- Quality score cards for BL
- …
Meso –
Dimensions and criteria : Evolution within Embed
Program Level
1. Program Design Principles: Program Coherence
2. Program Design Principles: Alignment of blended
learning tools
3. Program flexibility
4. Program modularity
5. Program Experience: Student Learning
6. Program Experience: Study Load
7. Program Experience: Inclusiveness
Institutional level
1. Institutional support
2. Institutional strategy
3. Sharing and openness
4. Professional development
5. Quality assurance
6. Governance
7. Finances
8. Facilities

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. I think the fundamental reason [to start with BL] is to give more meaning to your
classes. That is one reason to start BL. Another thing is that if you start BL,
you need to think about your design. Filling 2 hours in a [conventional] lecture for
a group of students is easy.
Creating a BL design requires thinking: why, for whom, added value?
_ lecturer

12. 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, exam questions) 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

13. 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

14. 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

15. BL PRACTICES IN CONTEXT
Multiple cases @ KU Leuven and TU Delft

16. COURSE DESIGN
• Lecturer’s aims: freeing up lecturing time to apply theory and support
problem-solving in the classroom, ‘trying something new’, internationally
local, FtC, integration of MOOCs into a BL approach
• In few instances: evidence or experience inform BL course design
• But there is ‘self-reflection on alternatives in order to optimize learning
outcomes’
VARIETY OF BL MATERIALS
• Limited number
• Media and technology selection > availability
https://limel.pageflow.io/ervaringen-mooc#39499
https://storyform.co/@veerle.vanrompaey/once-upon-a-time--b7322494feee#

17. TU Delft KU Leuven
Textbook
Slides (audio-supported)
Recorded lectures (video)
YouTube
Smartphones
Screencasts
Weblinks
MOOC (edX)
Wiki
Mymathlab
Maple TA
Textbook
Slides (with audio)
Recorded lectures (Video’s)
YouTube
Smartphones
Screencasts
Weblinks
MOOC (edX)
Learning analytics
Wiki, Blog
IT modeling tools (Merode, UML)
Design tools (Drupal),…
Less frequently used tools:
Wiki’s: e.g. “But the year before I made a wiki and I said okay, students can
put together their own set of notes and combine things, it ended at being
basically only one student really contributing “
Online communication tools such as forums have limited to no success.
Students do not use them (or very limited)

18. BLENDED EDUCATION CONTEXT – Support
SUPPORT AND INCENTIVES
(THAT WORK)
• Design of courses, evaluation,
redesign including planning
• 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’)

19. 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

20. Course design
process
Community and
instructor
presence
Variety of
materials
Personalization
and learner
control
Re-usability,
sharing,
resources and
openness
Studiability
KU Leuven Common practice Experimentation Experimentation Experimentation
Common practice
(limited)
Embedded practice
TU Delft
Common practice,
with ‘advanced’
aspects
Experimentation Common practice Experimentation Embedded practice Embedded practice
Preliminary maturity levels:
- Experimentation : limited design driven
- Common Practice: comprehensive design-driven, evidence-/experience- based
- Embedded Practice: comprehensive design-driven, evidence-/experience- based and
deliberate embedment of CQI processes and products in order to continuously improve a
course in an iterative manner

21. BL at the Institutional level
@ KU Leuven and TU Delft

22. CASE 1 – TU DELFT
22 500 students
5200 staff members
1 campus
8 faculties
Approximately 300 out of 1600
teachers are involved in online
and/or blended learning
Every student will have at least 1
BL course
Strategic framework 2018-2024
‘Impact for a better society’
CASE 2 – KU LEUVEN
57 200 students
20 500 staff members
14 campuses
15 faculties
Strategic framework 2018-2022
‘On crossroads, for a sustainable
society’

23. TU Delft Teaching Lab

24. KU LEUVEN
EDULAB – Virtual classrooms

25. TU DELFT Strategy
SPEARPOINTS BL explicitly mentioned: ”Innovation in teaching and
learning through a blend of online-and on-campus education” (p.14)
Related: OER, incentives for educational innovation, operational
excellence, campus infrastructure
CULTURE OF INNOVATION IN TEACHING & LEARNING
• experimentation with and development of different types of
education, including BL courses and programs
• evidence-based university education

26. A strategy to stimulate the use of BL, as part of a policy to enhance
study success, in the bachelor programs (2012-2013)
• Directors of education & the executive board
• As part of an agreement with government to increase study
success
• Focus on review of curricula, active learning, including BL
Since 2013: An ‘early adopter strategy’ for online learning
• The executive board
• Focus on MOOCs , open courseware, also BL
BL strategy until 2018
• Top-down and bottom-up approach
TU DELFT Strategy

27. KU LEUVEN Strategy
SPEARPOINTS BL mentioned as part of technology-supported education or multicampus education:
“For some learning goals, the best working method is the traditional lecture (…) Other learning
goals benefit from a combination of face-to-face education and e-learning.” (p.32)
“(…) multilocation learning calls for a better coordination between e-learning and face-to-face
education.” (p.31)
• BL is not explicitly mentioned, but, recently:
• A new educational strategy : focus on online assessment, a better network infrastructure ,
learning analytics, virtual reality, Micromasters and Moocs
• Hiring educational technologists
• The KU Leuven Learning Lab:
• Increased collaboration between the Educational Development Unit collaboration
with the technological Support Unit
• A more recent Educational and Technological support, structure and strategy
towards BL course designers
• Since 2015: targeted call to kick start MOOCs
• MOOC team in place to offer support for design and development
• Since 2018: targeted call for IDL project (innovative digital learning)
• Focus on Assessment & feedback
• 10 projects selected

28. 1. Maturity at strategical level from consolidated to systemic
implementation
o formal advocacy by university administrators and
departments
o strategic facilitation of wide-spread implementation
2. Maturity at the structural level systemic implementation
o robust structures involving academic unit leaders for strategic
decision making
o institution-driven evaluations addressing BL outcomes
3. Maturity at the support level systemic Implementation
o well established technological support to address BL/BT
needs
o robust BL course development process, systematic promotion
and dissemination
o well established faculty incentive structure for continuous
training and implementation
TU DELFT – Preliminary analysis

29. 1. Maturity at strategical level from consolidated to systemic implementation
o “Administrators identify purposes to motivate institutional adoption of
BL”
o “Tentative policies adopted and communicated to stakeholders, policies
revised as needed”
o But: “Individual faculty members implementing BL” (So at the moment:
bottom-up initiatives – individual passionate teachers
2. Maturity at the structural level consolidated implementation
o “Emerging structures primarily to regulate and approve BL courses”
o “Efforts to designate BL courses in registration/catalog System”
o ” “Not yet formal evaluations in place addressing BL learning outcomes”
3. Maturity at the support level from consolidated to systemic implementation
o “established technological and educational support to address BL/online
needs of all stakeholders”
o But:
o “Exploration of faculty incentive structure for faculty training and course development”
o “Experimentation and building of a formal course development process”
KU LEUVEN – Preliminary analysis

30. Sources
• Interviews with policy makers & the Educational Support Unit
• Strategic plan TU Delft 2018-2024: ‘Impact for a better society’
https://www.tudelft.nl/en/about-tu-delft/strategy/tu-delft-
strategic-framework-2018-2024/
• Strategic plan KU Leuven 2018-2022: ‘On crossroads, for a
sustainable society.’ https://www.kuleuven.be/english/about-
kuleuven/strategic-plan