This document presents a case study on using hybrid learning to promote e-learning in Cambodia, Indonesia, and Thailand. It discusses the current state of education in these countries, including language of instruction, number of schools, enrollment rates, and average school ages. It identifies problems with low ICT literacy, internet access, and e-learning usage in higher education. The study aims to promote the hybrid learning concept and analyze factors supporting e-learning utilization. The methodology involves literature reviews, benchmarking, SWOT and PESTEL analyses, and case studies of best practices from Malaysia and Korea.

1. Team 2
Using Hybrid Learning as A Stepping
Stone To Promote E-Learning
A Case Study on Cambodia , Indonesia and Thailand
Riri | Ardimas | Pornprom | Phoumen
ITP 620 : Introduction to IT Management/Policy in Korea
Course Offered By : Prof. Jae Jeung Rho
1

2. Using Hybrid Learning as A Stepping
Stone To Promote E-Learning
1. Rational
2. Problem Definition
3. Methodology
4. Scheduling
5. References
2

3. E-Learning
E-learning is the computer and network-enabled
transfer of skills and knowledge.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-learning

4. E-Learning Components
• Audience
• Course Structure
• Page Design ICT curr
• Content Engagement
• Usability
4

5. Why E-Learning Important
“e-Learning”
E-learning can provide poor
countries with the
Restricted Time Regional Distance opportunity to close a gap
with developed country.
Lifelong education through e-
learning is the future of
education and the enormous
market which has a number
of trillion dollars of potential
value. - Peter F. Drucker

6. Benefits of E-Learning
• Convenience and Flexibility
• Offers Individualized Instruction
• Self-paced
• Broader Range of Opinions
• Greater Range of Feedback
• More Direct Control
• High Level of Interaction
• High Levels of Participation, Engagement and
Concentration
Source: International Journal of The Computer, the Internet and Management Vol. 13.No.3 (September-
December, 2005) pp 79-89
6

7. E-Learning Short Comings
• E-learning has poor interactivity between
students and teacher or lecturer compare
with conventional learning.
• E-learning is only available to PC users.
• E-learning is more expensive.
Source: International Journal of The Computer, the Internet and Management Vol. 13.No.3 (September-December,
2005) pp 79-89
7

8. Conventional Learning
• conventional teaching and learning within a
brick-and-mortar classroom facility -
Curriculum ICT
http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/C/c_learning.html
8

9. Hybrid Learning
a model of course
design that
combines traditional,
face-to-face class
Curriculum ICT
time with online and
out-of-class course
work
9

10. Hybrid Learning-2
A formal education program in which a
student learns at least in part through online
delivery of instruction and content, with some
element of student control over time, place,
path and/or pace
and
at least in part in a supervised brick-and-
mortar location away from home.

11. On-line Off-line
Hybrid strategy

12. Hybrid Learning Models - 1
Hybrid Learning Models Rotation Flex
Students rotate on a fixed
A Physical Teacher employs Teachers provide on-site as
schedule between a self-
Online Learning in a needed support through in-
paced online learning and
Technology Lab / the back person tutoring or small
sittig in a classroom with a
of the classroom to group session
face-to-face teacher
supplement
12

13. Hybrid Learning Models (contd)
Online Driver
Online Lab Self-Blend
Students studies remotely
Students choose to take and face-to-face check ins are
An online platform delivers either available or mandatory
the entire course, but in a remote online courses to
brick-and-mortar location. supplement their schools’s
Students who participate traditional curriculum.
in online lab, usually also Popular among high
take traditional courses school student
13

14. Emerging models of blended learning
Rotation Flex Self-Blend Enriched Virtual
• Station rotation Online platform with Students attend Students learn
• Lab rotation F2F support and physical school & sometimes at a
• Flipped Classroom fluid schedules take 1 or more physical school, other
• Individual rotation courses online times remotely

15. Benefits of H.L
Students Point of View
• meets expectations for utilizing technology.
• develops independent learning skills.
• offers increased flexibility and convenience.
• provides better access to those with job, family, or distance barriers.
• helps reduce educational costs. More opportunities to interact with course
materials and resources, leading to greater engagement and enhanced
opportunities for success
• Higher-quality peer interaction
• Greater flexibility in course scheduling, a boon to UW Bothell’s high percentage of
working and commuting students
• Increased skills in self-directed learning leading to greater learner autonomy
• Skills in communicating effectively in multiple modes
• Increased technical skills
http://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/distance-learning/the-
benefits-of-blended-learning-explained/
15

16. Faculty Point of View
• gives them access to new resources.
• introduces them to online learning.
• is an opportunity for faculty development and lets them experiment with
new pedagogies and techniques.
• helps meet student expectations and build student skills.
• allows for more flexible scheduling.
• retains the face-to-face aspect faculty may cherish.
• Enhanced pedagogical practices as a result of redesigning the learning
experience
• Better student engagement
• More flexible schedule and better ability to work from different locations
• Enhanced opportunity to participate in interdisciplinary practices such as
course linking
• Better online pedagogical and technology skills while still retaining the
valued face-to-face interaction with students
16

17. Administrator Point of View
• impacts the entire institution.
• offers a learner-centered pedagogy.
• may integrate with the strategic plan.
• improves classroom utilization.
• can help match delivery to academic need.
• can help fill under-enrolled courses and
programs.
17

18. Cambodia
• 2009 - 2010
– Primary schools: 6,665
– Enrollment: 2,239,757
• 2005-2006
– Enrollment: 2,695,372
– Primary schools Teacher: 50,378
• Language of Instruction : Khmer
18

19. Indonesia
• Language of instruction : Bahasa
Indonesia
• # Elementary School : 143,272
• #Students : 24,863,936 (Public),
2,464,665 (Private)

20. Thailand
• Language of instruction : Thai
• # Elementary School : 33,043
(Public+Private)
• #Students : 4,006,326 (2007)
20

21. Countries Average Age
Level/Grade Cambodia Indonesia Thailand Cambodia Indonesia Thailand
1 Preschool 3-5 3-6 3-6
2 6 6 6
3 7 7 7
4 8 8 8
Primary School
5 9 9 9
6 10 10 10
7 11 11 11
8 12 12 12
9 13 13 13
10 Secondary School 14 14 14
11 15 15 15
12 16 16 16
13 Upper Secondary 17 17 17
14 Tertiary Education >18 18 18
21

22. Malaysia
• 2 Semesters : January ~ June & July ~
December
• 14 Level Start from Pre-school
Playgroup ~Tertiary School (University)
• Primary education begins at age seven
• Language of instruction : Malay
language (Bahasa Melayu)
• # Elementary School : 7,709
• #Students : 2,859,921
22

23. Republic of Korea
• 14 Level Start from Pre-school
Playgroup ~Tertiary School
(University)
• Language of instruction : Korean
language , English Taught starts From
Elementary
• # Elementary School : 5,757
• #Elementary School Students:
3,830,063
• #Computer to Student Ratio = 1 : 6
23

24. Overall ICT for Education Situation status
by UNESCO
Countries Appreciation of Availability of
Technology Technology
Cambodia HIGH LOW
Indonesia HIGH LOW
Malaysia HIGH HIGH
Republic of Korea HIGH HIGH
Thailand HIGH LOW
Source: Strategy Framework for Promoting ICT Literacy in the Asia-Pacific Region
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0016/001621/162157e.pdf
24

25. Internet access in schools
Cambodia :3.5
Indonesia : 4.7
Thailand : 4.5
Malaysia : 5.2
Korea : 6.2
25

26. IDI (ICT Development Index) - Skill
Generated by ITU to indicate total enrollment in specific level
of education regardless of age. Expressed as percentage
Cambodia : 9.2
Indonesia : 23.5
Thailand : 45.0
Malaysia : 37
Korea : 102
26

27. E-Learning in Universities
• Thailand : 173 Universities , 3 provides 100% E-
learning
– 1) Assumption University
http://www.elearning.au.edu/ Graduate school of
eLearning
– 2) School of IT, Rangsit U
http://it.rsu.ac.th/itmonline/Pages/index.aspx and
– 3) Thailand Cyber University
http://www.thaicyberu.go.th/index.php?lang=en-us
• Cambodia : 47 Universities
• Indonesia : 2647 Universities
27

28. Problem Definition
Low ICT Low Internet
Literacy for Access in
Higher Higher
Education Education
Low E-Learning Usage in Higher Education
28

29. Specific Problem
• Cambodia :
– Inadequate of power supply in rural area
– The high cost of electricity
– High Price for Internet Access
• Indonesia :
– Integration of ICT in the curriculum
– Decentralisation of the educational system
– The high cost of Internet connections
• Thailand
– Policy: Lack of strong support from the top executive level in many universities
– Technology: Lack of technical skills for online courses
– Financial: Inconsistent financial support and lack of longterm budget planning
– Human Resources:Lack of awareness of e-learning adoption
– Infrastructure:Inconvenient e-learning software and access
29

30. Goal
To Accelerate E-learning in
3 ASEAN countries
(Cambodia ,Indonesia
,Thailand ).
30

31. Objective
•To Promote Hybrid Learning Concept in
Higher Education among Cambodia,
Indonesia and Thailand.
•To Analyze E-learning utilization in
Cambodia, Indonesia and Thailand
•To analyze factors supporting E-learning
utilization in Malaysia and Korea
31

32. Scope of work
• What
– Hybrid Learning
• Who
– Higher Education (University , College)
• Where
– Indonesia, Cambodia, Thailand, Malaysia, Korea
• How
– Papers, Journals related with Hybrid Learning & E-
Learning
– Best practices & lesson learnt from Malaysia & Korea
32

33. Methodology
• Literature review
• Benchmarking
• Analyze with
– SWOT
– PESTEL
• Case studies and Best practices
33

34. Scheduling
Tasks Sep Oct Nov Dec
W3 W4 W1 W2 W3 W4 W1 W2 W3 W4 W1 W2 W3
1. Literature Review
2. Collecting Data
1) Cambodia
2) Indonesia
3) Korea
4) Malaysia
5) Thailand
3. Data Analysis
4. Recommendation
5. Submit draft final
report
6. Revising Report
7. Final Presentation
34

35. 35

36. References
1. Ministry of Education, Youth and sport, “Master Plan for Information and
Communication Technology in Education 2009-2015”
2. International Bureau of Education, “World Data on Education VII Ed. 2010/11”
3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_in_Indonesia2._Index (last accessed
25 September 2012)
4. http://www2.unpan.org/egovkb/datacenter/CountryView.aspx
5. LIST OF TABLES OF THE PRIMARY SCHOOL (PS) EDUCATION DATA YEAR
2009/2010
6. http://www.unescobkk.org/education/ict/ict-in-education-
projects/monitoring-and-measuring-change/performance-indicators-on-ict-
use-in-education-project/consultative-workshop/country-reports/indonesia/
(last accessed 25 September 2012)
7. Toward a Learning Society in Thailand: An Introduction to Education in
Thailand, http://www.bic.moe.go.th/fileadmin/BIC_Document/book/intro-
ed08.pdf (last accessed 26 September 2012)
8. UNESCO: Strategy Framework for Promoting ICT Literacy in the Asia-Pacific
Region http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0016/001621/162157e.pdf (last
accessed 26 September 2012)
36

37. 9. Theory on Blended Learning
http://www.knewton.com/blended-learning/
10.Korea e-Learning Industry Association
http://www.kelia.org/user/eng/eng100.jsp
11. From Blended Learning to E-Learning
http://www.elearningap.com/eLAP2006/Proc
eeding/p37.1-4-fin-54-Santhitorn.pdf
37

38. Team 2: Smart Education
Thank you for your participation
Riri | Ardimas | Pornprom | Phoumen
38