Reading 6 (Theme Three)

Reading 6 First reading on Theme Three: Issues, trends and Developments

Graham, Charles, R. (2007). Blended Learning Systems: Definition, Current trends, and Future Directions . In The Handbook of Blended Learning : Global Perspectives, Local Designs (pp3 – 21). C.Bonk & C. Graham. (Eds.) San Francisco: Pfeiffer

Graham’s definition: Blended learning systems combine face-to-face instruction with computer-mediated instruction.

Besides the most common reason for blending being the combination of the best of both worlds, Osguthorpe and Graham (cited, 2003) identified 6 reasons for blending:

1. pedagogical richness
2. access to knowledge
3. social interaction
4. personal agency
5. cost-effectiveness
6. ease of revision

Graham, Allen & Ure (2003,2005) elaborate on the most common:

· improved pedagogy – increased level of active learning strategies, peer-to-peer learning strategies, learner- centred strategies, improved levels of authenticity, collaborative learning and problem-solving

· increased access and flexibility – especially for more mature learners

· increased cost effectiveness – opportunity for reaching a large, globally dispersed audience in a short time with consistent, semi-personal delivery

Graham distinguishes 4 different levels of blends viz activity-level, course-level, program-level and institutional level then goes on to examine how to blend. He provides a table indicating the categories of blended learning systems that can be summarised as follows:

• enabling blends – address issues of access and convenience
• enhancing blends – allow incremental changes to pedagogy without radically changing the teaching/learning process
• transforming blends – allow a radical transformation of the pedagogy that enable intellectual activity not possible without technology

Six issues and challenges of blending are identified:

· The role of live interaction – under what conditions is human interaction important to the learning process and to learner satisfaction?

· The tension between a learner’s choice of a blended course vs their level of self-regulation

· Aspects of support and training – time factors, technological skills, organisational culture, professional development

· Digital divide between information and communication technologies available to different groups

· Cultural adaptation ; the need to balance global and local interests

· Balance between innovation and production in a constantly changing technological environment

Blends must take advantage of the strengths of each environment and avoid the weaknesses. A table is used to evaluate relative strengths and weaknesses of face-toface discussion with computer-mediated learning environments

Computer-mediated (asynchronous)

• strengths: flexibility, participation, depth of reflection
• weaknesses: spontaneity loss, procrastination, impersonal

Face-to-face (in-class)

• strengths: human connection, spontaneity
• weaknesses: limited participation, inflexibility of time

Future directions require

· identification of successful BL models at all levels that can be adapted to work in contexts.

· Capitalising on the unique affordances available in face-to-face, computer-mediated or distributed learning environments.

Discussion:

1. Without appropriate professional development, there could be a danger that at school level some blends could simply offer the same old teaching with additional novel student appeal. Mayer (2001 in Larreamendy-Joerns & Leinhardt, 2006) has shown that under some conditions multimedia presentations can actually hinder learning when visualisation focuses on irrelevant content and detail, a statement reminiscent of split attention problems related to cognitive load theory. How can one ensure the educational integrity of a blended approach?
2. Because of the traditional structure of schools, most school blends would be at the “enhancing blends” level. Should schools stop at this level and leave the transformational pedagogies to tertiary institutions? Is radical restructuring of schools to move to the transformational level justified in terms of the added learning value vs professional, financial and organisational demands?
3. Should some form of blended learning be made compulsory in schools in order to encourage and develop New Zealand’s intellectual capital in keeping with the MOE’s 2002 expectations (Anderson, 2005)?

References:

Larreamendy-Joerns, J. & Leinhardt, G. (2006). Going the distance with online education. Review of Educational Research, 76(4), 567-605.

Anderson, B. (2005). New Zealand: Is online education a highway to the future? (pp. 163-178).
In A.A. Carr-Chelman (Ed.), Global perspectives on e-learning: Rhetoric and reality. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.