Blended Learning: Why Our Choice?

Blended Learning: Why Our Choice?

By Alemu Abebe Woldie

Introduction

The term “blended learning” is being used with increased frequency in the academic world. As cited by Rooney, the American Society for Training and Development identified blended learning as one of the top ten trends to emerge in the knowledge delivery industry.

These days, a dramatic increase in the number of hybrid (i.e., blended) courses in higher education possibly includes as many as 80-90% of all courses (Young, 2002).
Even though blended learning has become Some what of a buzzword in higher education settings, there is still quite a bit of ambiguity about what is meant when the term is used.
How is blended learning different from other terms such as distributed learning, e-learning, open and flexible learning? Some define the term so broadly arguing that there is no any learning system that is not “blended”. Others challenge the very assumptions behind blending as holding onto relics of an old paradigm of learning (Graham, 2002).

In this article a trial will be made to highlight some points on blended learning and to briefly answer the question why we choose blended learning as method of content delivery.

What Is Being Blended?
One frequent question asked when one hears about blended learning (BL) is “What is being blended?” While there are a wide variety of responses to this question, most of the definitions are just variations of a few common themes. The three most commonly mentioned definitions documented by Graham, Allen, and Ure (2003) are:
1) BL = combining instructional modalities (or delivery media)
2) BL = combining instructional methods
3) BL = combining online and face-to-face instruction

The first two positions above reflect the debate on the influences of media versus method on learning. According to Clark and Kozma, both of these positions suffer from the problem that they define BL so broadly that there encompass virtually all learning systems. One would be hard pressed to find any learning system that did not involve multiple instructional methods and multiple delivery media. So defining BL in either of these two ways does not get at the essence of what blended learning is and why the concept of blended learning is exciting to so many people. As to Charles R. Graham the third position more accurately reflects the historical emergence of blended learning systems and is the foundation of the working definition This working definition reflects the idea that BL is the combination of instruction from two historically separate models of teaching and learning: traditional F2F learning systems and distributed learning systems. It also emphasizes the central role of computer-based technologies in blended learning.

Therefore, BL is part of the ongoing convergence of two learning environments. On the one hand, we have the traditional F2F learning environment that has been around for centuries. On the other hand, we have distributed learning environments that have begun to grow and expand in exponential ways as new technologies have expanded the possibilities for distributed communication and interaction.

Graham argue, that in the past, these two learning environments have remained largely separate because they have used different media/method combinations and have addressed the needs of different audiences. For example, traditional F2F learning typically occurred in a teacher-directed environment with person-to-person interaction in a live synchronous. On the other hand, distance learning systems emphasized self-paced learning and learning-materials interactions that typically occurred in an asynchronous environment. The widespread adoption and availability of digital learning technologies has led to increased levels of integration of computer-mediated instructional elements into the traditional F2F learning experience.

Why Our Choice?
There are many reasons why an instructor, trainer, or learner might pick blended learning over other learning options. Osguthorpe and Graham (2003) identified six reasons why one might chose to design or use a blended learning system:
(1) pedagogical richness,
(2) access to knowledge,
(3) social interaction,
(4) personal agency,
(5) cost effectiveness, and
(6) ease of revision.

In the BL literature, the most common reason provided is that BL combines “the best of both worlds”. While there is some truth to this, it is rarely acknowledged that a blended learning environment can also mix the least effective elements of both worlds if it is not designed well. Beyond this general argument (Graham et al. 2003) found that overwhelmingly people chose BL for three reasons:
(1) improved pedagogy,
(2) increased access/flexibility, and
(3) increased cost effectiveness.

Improved Pedagogy. As indicated above, one of the most commonly cited reasons for blending is more effective pedagogical practices. It is no secret that most current teaching and learning practice in higher education training setting is still focused on transmissive rather than interactive strategies. In higher education, 83% of instructors use the lecture as the predominant teaching strategy (U.S. Department of Education, 2001). Some have seen blended learning approaches increase the level of active learning strategies, peer-to-peer learning strategies, and learner centered strategies.

Increased Access/Flexibility. Access to learning is one of the key factors influencing the growth of distributed learning environments. Many emphasize that programs would not be possible if students are not able to have a majority of their learning experiences at a distance from instructors and/or other students. Learner flexibility and convenience is also of growing importance as more mature learners with outside commitments (such as work and family) seek additional education. Many learners want the convenience offered by a distributed environment, and, at the same time, do not want to sacrifice the social interaction and human touch they are used to in a F2F classroom. It is possible to cite numerous examples of how blending is used to provide a balance between flexible learning options and the high touch human interactive experience.

Increased Cost Effectiveness. Cost effectiveness is a third major goal for BL systems in higher education institutions. Blended learning systems provide an opportunity for reaching a large, globally dispersed audience in a short period of time with consistent content delivery.

Wrap Up
Even though we choose BL as an appropriate mode of content delivery, it does not mean that it is 100% perfect. There are issues or challenges that we face when blending. We need to consider six issues when designing BL systems. These include:
(1) the role of live interaction(f2f),
(2) the role of learner choice and self-regulation,
(3) approaches for support, training and tutoring,
(4) finding balance between technological innovation and production of contents,
(5) cultural adaptation, and
(6) dealing with the digital divide

What do we mean by these Challenges (Core Issues)?
The Role Of Live Interaction (F2f)
We need to get answers for these questions: Under what conditions is human interaction important to the learning process and to learner satisfaction with the process? When and why should we be considering human interaction such as collaboration and learning communities?

Role of Learner Choice/Self Regulation. How are learners making choices about the kinds of blends that they participate in? How can blended learning environments be designed to support increasing learner knowledge and skills and capabilities for self-regulation?

Approaches For Support And Tutoring. There are many issues related to support and tutoring in blended environments including:
(1) providing learners with technological skills to succeed in both F2F and online environments,
(2) changing organizational culture to accept blended approaches ,
(3) the need to provide professional development for instructors that will be teaching online and F2F
(5) the need to see more successful models of how to support a blended approach to learning from both the technological infrastructure and organizational (human) perspectives.

Finding Balance Between Technological Innovation And Production Of Contents. In designing BL content, there is a constant tension between innovation and production. Hence, there is a need to look forward to the possibilities that new technological innovations provide and, there is a need to be able to produce cost effective solutions. However, due to the constantly changing nature of technology, finding an appropriate balance between innovation and production will be a constant challenge for those designing blended learning systems.

Cultural Adaptation. This is a check what blended approaches play in adapting materials to local learners. This indicates the need for customizing the materials to the local learners to make them culturally relevant.

Dealing with the Digital Divide. This refers to the divide between the information and communication technologies available to individuals and societies at different ends of the socio-economic spectrum (to address the issue of information poor vs information rich).
By giving due attention to the above shortly described issues, it is possible to transform the conventional pedagogy radically. This, we can call, is a change from a model where learners are just receivers of information to a model where learners actively construct knowledge and skills through dynamic interactions.

REFERENCES
1. Bersin & Associates. (2003). Blended learning: What works?: An industry study of the
strategy, implementation, and impact of blended learning: Bersin & Associates.
2. Bonk, C. J., Olson, T., Wisher, R. A., & Orvis, K. (2002). Reflections on blended
distributed learning: The armor captains career course.
3. Clark, R. E. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of
Educational Research, 53(4), 445-459.
4. ------------ (1994). Media and method. Educational Technology Research & Development, 42(3), 7-10.
5. ----------- Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research & Development, 42(2), 21-29.
6. Collis, B. (2003). Course redesign for blended learning: modern optics for technical
professionals. International Journal of Continuing Engineering Education and
Lifelong Learning, 13(1/2), 22-38.
7. Cottrell, D., & Robison, R. (2003). Blended learning in an accounting course. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 4(3), 261-269.
8. Dabbagh, N. (2004). Distance learning: Emerging pedagogical issues and learning
designs. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 5(1), 37-49.
9. Graham, C. R., Allen, S., & Ure, D. (2003). Blended learning environments: A review of the research literature.
10. Kozma, R. B. (1991). Learning with media. Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 179-211.
11. Osguthorpe, R. T., & Graham, C. R. (2003). Blended learning systems: Definitions and directions. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 4(3), 227-234.
12. Rooney, J. E. (2003). Blending learning opportunities to enhance educational
programming and meetings. Association Managment, 55(5), 26-32.
13. U.S. Department of Education. (2001). The condition of education 2001 (2001-072).
Washington, DC: National Center for Edcuational Statistics.
14. Young, J. R. (2002, March 22). 'Hybrid' teaching seeks to end the divide between
traditional and online instruction. Chronicle of Higher Education