Vaughan Power Cnie08

Taking Blended Learning a Step FurtherTaking Blended Learning a Step FurtherDr. Norman Vaughan & Dr. Michael Power

OverviewOverview

University of Calgary ContextLaval University ContextBlended LearningBlended Online LearningDiscussion:

What is the impact of BL & BOL on the quality of online courses offered by university faculty?What impact does it have on the quality of online student learning?Does such a blended environment enable faculty to “go online” faster, thus making higher education more easily accessible to the Canadian public?

University of CalgaryUniversity of Calgary

Calgary > 1M population

40 yr old campus‐based institution

~30,000 students & growing 

80% plus HS average to get in

Top 10 in research funding

81 students per class (junior level)

Increasing student dissatisfaction

Institutional Learning Plan

That inquiry-based learning approaches be at the centre of the undergraduate learning experience.All students must have the opportunity to participate in communities of inquiryLearning technologies (i.e., eLearning) offer opportunities to enhance the campus experience and extend learning through the innovative use of on-line resources, asynchronous collaborative learning opportunities, and electronic communication.

Community of Inquiry Framework

Social Presence

The ability of participants

‐ to identify with the 

community (e.g., course 

of study), 

‐communicate

purposefully in a trusting 

environment, and 

‐develop inter‐personal 

relationships by way of 

projecting their 

individual personalities.

Cognitive PresenceThe extent to which learners are able to ‐construct and confirmmeaning through sustained reflectionand discourse in a critical community of inquiry.

Teaching PresenceThe design, facilitation and direction of cognitive and social processes for the purpose of realizing personally meaningful and educationally worthwhile learning outcomes.

Blended Learning Blended Learning –– Campus BasedCampus Based

"At its core, blended learning is the thoughtful fusion of face‐to‐face and online learning experiences. The basic principle is that face‐to‐face oral communication and online written communication are optimally integrated such that the strengths of each are blended into a unique learning experience congruent with the context and intended educational purpose. ... 

Garrison, D. R. & Vaughan, N. D. (2008). Blended Learning in Higher Education: Framework, Principles, and Guidelines. SF: Wiley.

Blended Learning Blended Learning –– Campus BasedCampus Based

Face‐to‐FaceClassroom Learning

Experiences

OnlineLearning

ExperiencesIntegration

Laval University ContextLaval University Context

Quebec City > .8 M population;

2nd oldest university (Canada and US);

~36,000 students & growing; 

Top 10 in research funding;

Student mobility and international experience a major priority for all undergraduate programs;

Increasing student interest in online learning & accessing online resources

http://www.elcolmadito.com/Arte/MasProductos/PerezCafetera_3_2.jpg

BOTTLENECKIN SUPPLY

OF HE

DEMAND

SUPPLY

UniversitUniversitéé LAVALLAVAL

The institution

Project: from Blended Learning to Blended Online Learning

The BOL concept

Implications

““A Blended Online Learning EnvironmentA Blended Online Learning Environment

…is the simultaneous and complimentary integration and implementation of an asynchronous‐mode learning environment (i.e. a course management system, or CMS) and a synchronousdesktop conferencing environment”(i.e. a virtual classroom)”.Power (2008) AERA.

ON-CAMPUS DESIGN & DELIVERY

© Michael Power, 2008

A Blended Online Learning EnvironmentA Blended Online Learning Environment

ONLINE DESIGN & DELIVERYON-CAMPUS DESIGN & DELIVERY

© Michael Power, 2008

A Blended Online Learning EnvironmentA Blended Online Learning Environment

ONLINE DESIGN & DELIVERY

FACULTY

ON-CAMPUS DESIGN & DELIVERY

© Michael Power, 2008

“Faculty”= faculty-led instruction

SYNCHRONOUS

A Blended Online Learning EnvironmentA Blended Online Learning Environment

Traditional Higher Education

ONLINE DESIGN & DELIVERY

FACULTY

ON-CAMPUS DESIGN & DELIVERY

© Michael Power, 2008

“Faculty”= faculty-led instruction

SYNCHRONOUS

A Blended Online Learning EnvironmentA Blended Online Learning Environment

SYSTEM

ASYNCHRONOUS

Online Learning

“System”= system-managed instruction

Traditional Higher Education

ONLINE DESIGN & DELIVERY

FACULTY

ON-CAMPUS DESIGN & DELIVERY

© Michael Power, 2008

“Faculty”= faculty-led instruction

SYNCHRONOUS

A Blended Online Learning EnvironmentA Blended Online Learning Environment

SYSTEM

ASYNCHRONOUS

Online Learning

“System”= system-managed instruction

Traditional Higher Education

Blended Learning

ONLINE DESIGN & DELIVERY

FACULTY

ON-CAMPUS DESIGN & DELIVERY

© Michael Power, 2008

“Faculty”= faculty-led instruction

SYNCHRONOUS

A Blended Online Learning EnvironmentA Blended Online Learning Environment

SYSTEM

ASYNCHRONOUS

Online Learning

“System”= system-managed instruction

Traditional Higher Education

Blended LearningBlended ONLINEBlended ONLINELearningLearning

Designing for a BOLE

SynchronousOral

> spontaneous

> lively

< autonomy required

> passion

> creative

AsynchronousWritten

> reflective

> structured

< intimidating

> reason

> rigour

integrate

complement

Inquiry Cycle Approach (Norm’s view)

1. Before a synchronous session2. During a synchronous session3. After a synchronous session4. At the next synchronous meeting

Inquiry Cycle – Before a synchronous session

Triggering activity ‐ introduction to a course concept/topic with an attempt to identify the key questions or issues

Inquiry Cycle – Synchronous session

Opportunities to explore the key questions through synchronous discussion and debate

Inquiry Cycle – After synchronous session

Further exploration and a start towards tentative integration through the ability to connect theory to practice through collaborative project work

Inquiry Cycle – Next synchronous session

Discussion of the self‐ reflection and/or peer review process that led to a sense of resolution/application

Inquiry Cycle Approach (Mike’s view)

1. During a synchronous session

2. After a synchronous session1. Individual Work

2. Teamwork

3. At the next synchronous meeting

DURING A SYNCHRONOUS MEETINGI tell you

there’s bullionto be had!

DURING A SYNCHRONOUS MEETINGSo, do yourwork and getback up here!

Chomsky, 1986; Marton, D. Hounsell, and N. Entwistle, 1984  (deep structure)

AFTER THE SYNCHRONOUS MEETING

IndividualWORK‐readings‐quiz‐personal Qs

IndividualWORK‐readings‐quiz‐personal Qs

AFTER THE SYNCHRONOUS MEETING

TEAM WORK TEAM WORK‐Review of Individual work‐Teams Qs & Debate Qs

AT THE NEXT SYNCHRONOUS MEETING Great workpeople!! 

Let’s see whatyou got!

Projected opportunities ‐ Students

Increase in student accountability for ownership of  learning (control and responsibility)

More complete course format (virtual face‐to‐face; high‐level faculty‐student and student‐student dialogue);

Improvement in learning outcomes;

Decrease in drop‐out/ failure (DF) rates;

Projected opportunities ‐ Faculty

Overall, + flexible teaching and learning environmentBorderless teaching, reaching more (& potentially better) students;Teaching more “interest‐related” courses, thereby narrowing the teaching‐research divide;Enhanced faculty interaction with students;Less front‐end design (compared to Web courses);Greater “continuity of practice” (Power,2008)Increased student engagement in learningMore realistic level of student autonomy

Projected opportunities ‐ Administration

Overall improvement in cost/effectiveness ratio;Lower structure & associated front‐end design costs;Lower drop‐out and failure rates;Levels of structure & dialogue sustainable;More flexible teaching and learning environment;Some economy of scale possible;

Greater qualityGreater frequency of content refresh & increased course redesign (incrementalimprovement)

Challenges ‐ Students

GeneralTransition – from a passive to an active & collaborative learning approachStudy and timemanagement skillsExpecting that online learning means no classes, exclusively individual work & perhaps less work than on‐campus classes;Adjusting to online synch and asynch teamwork;Accepting responsibility for completing individual & team activities;

TechnicalObtaining high‐speed Internet access;Learning to use more sophisticated technologies

Challenges ‐ Faculty

Managing risk factors

Resistance to change

Managing with scarce support for course redesign;

If online for the first time, developing new skills and learning to use new technology;

If formerly online in asynchronous mode, returning to a synchronous mode of teaching;

Managing potential technology crashes;

Discussion

What is the impact of a BOLE on the quality of online courses offered by university faculty?

What impact does it have on the quality of online student learning?

Does a BOLE enable faculty to “go online”faster? If so, will this result in higher education becoming more easily accessible to the Canadian public, even learners worldwide?

Contact us!

Dr. Michael PowerDepartment of Studies on 

Teaching & LearningFaculty of EducationUniversité Laval 2320 rue des BibliothèquesQuebec City (Québec) G1V 0A6Ph: (418) 656‐2131 #5467Fax: (418) 656‐2905Email: michael.power@fse.ulaval.ca

Dr. Norman VaughanDepartment of Education & 

SchoolingFaculty of Teaching & LearningMount Royal College4825 Mount Royal Gate SWCalgary, Alberta, CanadaT3E 6K6Ph: (403) 440‐5587Fax: (403) 440‐7024Email: nvaughan@mtroyal.ca