Presentation on theme: "1 Overview of Blended Models and Course Re- design Patricia McGee, Ph.D. The University of Texas at San Antonio Patricia McGee - This work is licensed."— Presentation transcript:
1 Overview of Blended Models and Course Re- design Patricia McGee, Ph.D. The University of Texas at San Antonio Patricia McGee - This work is licensed under the Creative Commons NonCommercial Sampling Plus 1.0 License. To view a copy of this license, visit
2 agenda Defining the Blend Models Re-Design Overview
5 What is the % blend? University of Central Florida mix of study modes – pure distance – face-to-face – between 90–10 and 10– 90 (Brown, 2001).Brown, 2001) Time per course (semester): hours
6 Trends in blended 50-70% + institutions in US offer blended Women participate and succeed in blended/online courses at a higher rate than do men Web 2.0 and mobile tech have higher level of integration that in F2F Formal and informal learning Individual assets + virtual teams Students tend to earn higher grades (Penn State) Accelerated learning is often a result of blended design (CM OLI) From
7 Blended courses can… ◦ Lead to using more participatory and student- centered learning activities ◦ Transform the teacher- student relationship to be more centered on student learning ◦ Transform the instructor role to be more facilitative and learner-centered ◦ Other?
8 Guided informal learning.edu
9 Discussion: Two sides of blended Appeal?Challenges? VS.
10 What does this mean for us? Learner preparedness and preparation Organization and explanation of course Scope of course content and activities Course standards and expectations
12 THE MODELS eHandout
13 Focus: What’s your model? What do you look for/want in a framework for developing a blended course? What helps you develop a course?
14 Workforce Blended/Hybrid Model Two or more forms of distinct methods of instruction, such as Classroom + online (traditional blended) Online + mentor or coach (e.g., independent study) Simulations with structured classes (e.g., Second Life™ and FTF) On-the-job training + informal learning (e.g., internships) Managerial coaching + eLearning (e.g., practicum) (Maisie, 2002, p. 59)
15 U of Wolverhampton Model 1.Creative and stimulating use of electronic content 2.Collaborative Learning 3.Formative Assessment with integrated feedback 4.Electronic Personal Development Planning ePDP to increase learner’s awareness of themselves,Electronic Personal Development Planning ePDP 5.Save time and paper with electronic assignments
16 Hybrid Online Model (Martyn)
17 Design Principles 1 st class FTF ChatOnline Quizzes DiscussionLast class FTF 1. Student - Faculty Interaction XXXX 2. Student- Student Interaction XXXX 3. Active Learning XXXXX 4. Prompt Feedback XXXX 5. Time on Task X 6. High Expectations X 7. Respect Diverse Talents X Marjorie Martyn
18 The HyFlex Course Model Brian Beatty, San Francisco State University, HyFlex Blog: HyFlex Papers and Presentations: Veronica Diaz, PhD
20 STARTING POINT Instructional Tech graduate program – Established, face to face history – 130 students, 3 FT faculty, 5-10 PT faculty – Regional campus (workers and commuters—2+ hours) Seminar courses – Instructional Technology topics (learning, design, integration, media, etc.) Technology users Veronica Diaz, PhD
21 HyFlex Course Principles/Values Learner Choice: Provide meaningful alternative participation modes and enable students to choose between participation modes weekly (or topically). Equivalency: Provide equivalent learning activities in all participation modes. Reusability: Utilize artifacts from learning activities in each participation mode as “learning objects’ for all students. Accessibility: Equip students with technology skills and access to all participation modes. Veronica Diaz, PhD
22 Two Course Types Type A: Small to moderate interactive classes – Content presentation and class discussion – Ex: Graduate seminars Type B: Large lecture classes – Minimal in-class interaction among students and faculty – Ex: Undergraduate required courses Veronica Diaz, PhD
Type A: Student Experience Class Topic, Goals, Other Factors Attend Class in person? Online Agenda In-class Agenda Shared Resources Online Activity (discussion) In-class Activity (discussion) Demonstrate Class Outcomes Independent Activity (information) Veronica Diaz, PhD
24 Weekly Topic Area For Content Veronica Diaz, PhD
26 Type B: Lecture Capture Lecture capture technology is capable of packaging and distributing lectures in different formats (Rich media echo, Podcast (MP3), Enhanced Podcast, Video). Veronica Diaz, PhD
27 Results (brief) 80% say they learned as much as expected or more 80% prefer blended classes; 60% prefer to choose their own blend (HyFlex) Some like working online, most like in-class; (almost) all like flexibility Veronica Diaz, PhD
28 HyFlex Fit: Discussion What value would it add? (student-control, increased online offerings, resolve scheduling conflicts, increased course enrollment) What support/cost would it require? (training, staff, technology, admin structure, faculty/student acceptance)
29 Discussion: HyFlex Fit Can the content be taught in both modes? Can students learn in both modes? Can the faculty teach in both modes? Do administrative structures support both? Veronica Diaz, PhD
30 The Multimodal Model (Picciano) Blending w/ Purpose Content – CMS, media, SM Social/Emot ional – F2F Dialectic/Q uestioning - Discussion Forum Synthesis/Eval uation – Assignment, Assessment Collaboration/S tudent -generated Content – wiki Reflection – blog, journal
31 Multimodal Learning Through Media Research (Cisco) From
32 CoP Model of BlendedLearning Yukawa, J. (2010).Communities of Practice for Blended Learning: Toward an Integrated Model for LIS Education. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science 51 (2), From
33 CoP Example SME approach Big QuestionsExpert Teams Research and Report Critique and Reassess Revise and Disseminate Publish, present, take action
34 Activity: Make your own model What appeals to you most from the models? (see handout) What can you modify or extend so that you can follow through the design process?
35 RE-DESIGN OVERVIEW
36 Backwards Design Beyond course Transfer Desired Results Performance Criterion Reference Informal/Unplan ned Evidence Explain Interpret Apply Have perspective Empathize Have self- knowledge Learning Design
37 Overview of Re-design Process ObjectivesAssessmentActivities/Assignments
38 Backwards Design Applied Communicate to multiple audiences Desired Results Blog post (visits/posts?) Video (hits/downloads?) eZine (posts/subscription ?) Evidence Observe Study/Researc h Design Test/pilot Revise Implement Learning Design
39 Overview of Blend Process TimeSequenceLocation
40 Bergtrom, G. (2011). Content vs. learning: An old dichotomy in science courses.Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 15 (1)
41 Bergtrom, G. (2011). Content vs. learning: An old dichotomy in science courses.Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 15 (1)
42 Bergtrom, G. (2011). Content vs. learning: An old dichotomy in science courses.Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 15 (1)
43 Activity: Your priorities What are your high priority outcomes? What are the desired results for the course?
44 Take-aways Consider high level approaches of design Consider process re-design Start with the end in mind
45 Patricia McGee, PhD This work is licensed under the Creative Commons NonCommercial Sampling Plus 1.0 License. To view a copy of this license, visit