This document discusses the design and evaluation of blended learning scenarios for teacher training. It aims to train pre-service teachers to integrate technology into their classrooms. It does this by teaching technological knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, and their intersection (TPACK). Trainees learn by designing learning activities individually and collaboratively. They use tools like Learning Designer and communities of inquiry to foster reflection and discourse. The blended learning scenarios' effectiveness is evaluated across six areas: learning outcomes, teacher performance, institutional support, course design, sociability, and adult orientation. The scenarios were implemented with various groups of educators and found high levels of teaching presence, social presence, and cognitive presence.

1. Kyparisia Papanikolaou
kpapanikolaou@aspete.gr
School of Technological and
Pedagogical Education
Stavros Karkanis
sk@teilam.gr
TEI of Central Greece

2. Challenges
A. Designing blended learning Scenarios for teacher
training on integrating ICT
 What to teach: combining technological skills & pedagogical
knowledge
 How to implement the curriculum : in a constructive
manner promoting reflection, collaboration, and discourse
B. Evaluating blended learning scenarios
 How to evaluate the effectiveness of blended learning
training

4. The aim: the super duper teacher

5. Our focus
 Target group: pre-service teachers of various disciplines
in integrating technology in classroom
 WHAT to teach: TPACK for designing the curriculum -
which types of knowledge need to be cultivated?
 HOW they learn: Communities of Inquiry for
designing collaborative learning design - how to
implement the curriculum ?

6. WHAT to teach
Technological Knowledge (TK)
Familiarize with
 searching, sharing, and evaluating web resources for
educational and multimedia content: evaluation
criteria for web resources and copyright issues,
 web 2.0 tools for graphical representations
(wordclouds, comics, timelines, interactive posters),
digital storytelling, and assessment,
 learning design and authoring tools
 Classroom management systems

7. WHAT to teach
Content Knowledge (CK)
 Assumption: trainees have sufficient content
knowledge
 Aim: promote a culture of interdisciplinary
collaboration

8. WHAT to teach
Pedagogical Knowledge (PK)
The learning activities that trainees design for their students
 are based on the Learning by Design framework that uses
eight ‘knowledge processes’ (i.e. types of activities)
(Kalantzis and Cope 2012): (i) Experiencing the known, (ii)
Experiencing the new, (iii) Conceptualizing by naming, (iv)
Conceptualizing with theory, (v) Analyzing functionally, (vi)
Analyzing critically, (vii) Applying appropriately, and (viii)
Applying creatively.
 should also involve teaching/didactic techniques, tools and
resources, guidelines, and roles of those participated.

9. on the intersection of TK, CK, PK…
TPACK (Mishra and Koehler, 2006) –
limited implementation in teacher
training. We use it for
 designing a learning scenario in
Learning Designer (Charlton,
Magoulas, Laurillard, 2012) and
authoring it in INSPIREus
(Papanikolaou, 2014) or LAMS and
 Peer-evaluation learning designs of
technology enhanced courses
authored by trainees

10. How they learn
Activities that focus on various types of knowledge
 TPK (technological pedagogical knowledge) activities
that raise questions about the appropriate matching of
technologies with various pedagogical approaches,
 TCK (technological content knowledge) activities that
raise questions about how difficult concepts or
misunderstandings might be faced using technology,
 TPACK (technological pedagogical content knowledge)
activities that raise questions about how a new
technology might best serve specific learning
outcomes going beyond all three types of knowledge
all in f2f meetings and online forum activities

11. Collaboration script (Dillenbourg and Hong 2008):
1. work individually in order to familiarize with various
pedagogical and technological tools by designing
learning activities, and reflect on their added value
- start in class during F2F workshops and continue online
2. Collaborative design and authoring an educational
scenario that integrates technological and
pedagogical tools
– work mainly online through asynchronous discussions
How they learn

12. Communities of Inquiry
(Garisson & Vaughan, 2008)

13. Glogsters
Comic
Concept maps
Timerime
Technological tools
Wordclouds
Learning design &
authoring tools
Web 2.0 tools/resources

14. Pedagogical tools
Knowledge processes as
learning outcomes
(Kalantzis & Cope, 2012)
Pragmatist
ReflectorActivist
Theorist
Individual characteristics
Types of acivities
(Laurillard, 2012)

15. http://politikoi.weebly.com

16. Case studies
The blended learning scenarios were offered in
Undergraduate students (civil engineering educators)
of the Higher School of Pedagogical and Technological
Education (ASPETE)
Undergraduate students (Informatics) of TEI of
Central Greece
Students of the one-year postgraduate certificate in
education of the Higher School of Pedagogical and
Technological Education (ASPETE) for graduates of a
variety of disciplines
Postgraduate students of the university of Athens

17. Undergraduates of ASPETE
Civil Engineering Educators

18. Community of Inquiry?
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
Teaching Presence Social Presence Cognitive Presence
ASPETE Undergraduates
TEI of Central Greece
Teacher Training Course

20. EVALUATION OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF
BLENDED LEARNING SCENARIOS
• Determined 6 Areas of Effectiveness which
cover the whole educational procedure
• Areas were quantified with measurable
factors that affect the specific educational
programs

21. Areas of effectiveness
1. Learning Outcomes
Ranking of educational goals and performance
2. Teacher’s Performance
How the teachers met the program’s requirements
3. Institutional Support
How the institute supported the whole procedure
4. Course Design
The way that the program was organized according to the required
needs
5. Sociability
How the sociability was developed during the course and between
the teachers and the learners
6. Adult Orientation
How the educational procedure was adapted to the students’ needs
who were adults

22. Areas Factors
1. Learning
Outcomes
a) Learners’ Performance.
b)Learners’ Personal Knowledge Goals.
c) Learning Goals Objectives of the Course.
2. Teachers
Performance
a) Support and Motivation to Learners.
b)Frequency of Communication between
Teachers and Learners.
c) Frequency of Response to Questions.
d)Familiarization with the Specific Program.
e) Teaching Methods.
3. Institutional
Support
a) Technical support.
b)Information and Consultancy Services.
c) Pre training plans.
Areas & Factors (1)

23. Areas Factors
4. Course Design
a) Technological structures.
b)Methods of Assessment.
c) Course material.
5. Sociability
a) Course as a Learning Community.
b) Teachers’ Ability to Enforce Sociability.
c) Interaction between Teachers and Learners.
d) Interaction with Technological Applications.
e) Frequency of online Participation.
6. Adult Orientation
a) Level of Self Directed Learning.
b) Applicability of Gained Knowledge.
c) Course Flexibility.
d) Learners’ Involvement in the Design of the
Educational Procedure.
Areas & Factors (2)

24. 0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
5.00
A1 A2 A3 B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 F1 F2 F3 F4
aver
st. dev.
Learning
Outcomes
Teacher’s
Performance
Institutional
Support
Course Design Sociability
Adult
Orientation
A few statistics

25. Τhe research “Design,
Implementation and Evaluation of
Blended Learning Scenarios in a
Teacher Training Context
Accommodating their Individual
Psychological Characteristics
(BleSTePsy)” is implemented
through the Operational Program
“Education and Lifelong Learning”
and is co-financed by the European
Union (European Social Fund) and
Greek national funds.
Thank you for your time!
Homo sapiens digital accepts
digital enhancement as an
integral fact of human
existence, and s/he is
digitally wise.
Digital wisdom means not
just manipulating
technology easily or even
creatively; it means making
wiser decisions because one
is enhanced by technology
(Prensky, 2009)