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

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. 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. 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

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
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.

7. 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’

8. 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

9. • 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

10. 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

11. 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)

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, ….) 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
Thematic Analyses
Drivers & Enablers
Individual drivers
Internal Institutional drivers
External drivers

16. 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.”

17. 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

18. 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, …

19. 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
• …

20. BLENDED EDUCATION CONTEXT – Laurillard’s Model
Laurillard, D. (2014). Thinking about blended learning A paper for the Thinkers in
Residence programme, (December), 1–26.

21. 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
- …

22. 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