[en] Together with the rapid growth of blended courses implemented in higher education, instructors and researchers are keen on exploring the efficient models of blended learning (BL) to enhance students' achievement. While many BL theoretical models exist, robust empirical evidence confirming instructors' strategies and implementation is still scarce, particularly the possible differences as a function of disciplines. To address this lack of evidence, a qualitative study was conducted among 29 instructors in a large public university in Vietnam. Employing the Content-Construction- Communication framework as the guiding lens, the present study conducted semi-structured interviews to capture how instructors in hard and soft disciplines designed and implemented their blended courses. The findings revealed that instructors from hard and soft sciences shared both similarities and differences in their instructional strategies. Similar aspects included the alignment of course objectives with learning activities design and assessment, recognition of the importance of students' individual learning and collaborative learning, and responsiveness regarding students' questions. Yet, differences were observed in the design of both individual and collaborative online activities and instructors' online facilitation. Thus, the results provide a clear picture of different BL designs, which can be helpful for instructional designers and policies aimed at professional development support for successful BL implementation.
Disciplines :
Education & instruction
Author, co-author :
Vo, Minh Hien
Zhu, Chang
Diep, Anh Nguyet ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Département des sciences de la santé publique > Simulation en santé publique
Language :
English
Title :
Examining Blended Learning Implementation in Hard and Soft Sciences: A Qualitative Analysis
Publication date :
2020
Journal title :
International Journal of Research in Education and Science
Adams, J., Hanesiak, R. M., Owston, R., Lupshenyuk, D. & Mills, L. (2009). Blended learning for soft skills development. New York: Institute for Research on Learning Technologies, York University.
Anderson, R. S. (1998). Why talk about different ways to grade? The shift from traditional assessment to alternative assessment. New directions for Teaching and Learning, 1998(74), 5-16.
Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing environment. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2).
Arbaugh, J. B., Bangert, A., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2010). Subject matter effects and the community of inquiry (CoI) framework: An exploratory study. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(1-2), 37-44.
Ausburn, L. J. (2004). Course design elements most valued by adult learners in blended online education environments: An American perspective. Educational Media International, 41(4), 327-337.
Awidi, I. T., & Paynter, M. (2019). The impact of a flipped classroom approach on student learning experience. Computers & Education, 128, 269-283.
Banerjee, G. (2011). Blended environments: Learning effectiveness and student satisfaction at a small college in transition. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 15(1), 8-19
Bangert, A. W. (2004). The seven principles of good practice: A framework for evaluating on-line teaching. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(3), 217-232.
Bates, T. (2019). Teaching in a Digital Age: Guidelines for Designing and Learning. Tony Bates Associates Limited. Retrieved from https://pressbooks.bccampus.ca/teachinginadigitalagev2/
Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Schmid, R. F., & Tamim, R. M. (2014). An exploration of bias in meta-analysis: the case of technology integration research in higher education. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 26(3), 183-209.
Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Schmid, R. F., Tamim, R. M., & Abrami, P. C. (2014). A meta-analysis of blended learning and technology use in higher education: From the general to the applied. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 26(1), 87–122. http://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-013-9077-3.
Biggs, J. (2003). Aligning teaching for constructing learning. Higher Education Academy, 1-4.
Biglan, A. (1973). The characteristics of subject matter in different academic areas. Journal of applied Psychology, 57(3), 195.
Boys, C., Brennan, J., Henkel, M., Kirkland, J., Kogan, M., Youl, P., (1988). Higher Education and Preparation for Work. Jessica Kingsley Publishers, London.
Broadbent, J. (2017). Comparing online and blended learner's self-regulated learning strategies and academic performance. The Internet and Higher Education, 33, 24-32.
Chen, S. W., Stocker, J., Wang, R. H., Chung, Y. C., & Chen, M. F. (2009). Evaluation of self-regulatory online learning in a blended course for post-registration nursing students in Taiwan. Nurse Education Today, 29(7), 704-709.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education. Routledge.
Diep, A. N., Zhu, C., Struyven, K., & Blieck, Y. (2017). Who or what contributes to student satisfaction in different blended learning modalities? British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(2), 473-489.
Fry, H., Ketteridge, S., & Marshall, S. (4ed). (2014). A handbook for teaching and learning in higher education: Enhancing academic practice. Routledge.
Gale, N. K., Heath, G., Cameron, E., Rashid, S., & Redwood, S. (2013). Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 13(1), 117.
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87−105.
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 7-23.
Graham, C. R. (2006). Blended learning systems. In: D. C. J. Bonk & C. R. Graham, The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs (pp. 3–21). San Francisco, CA.: Pfeiffer.
Graham, C. R., & Robinson, R. (2007). Realizing the transformational potential of blended learning: Comparing cases of transforming blends and enhancing blends in higher education. Blended Learning: Research Perspectives, 83–110.
Graham, C. R., Woodfield, W., & Harrison, J. B. (2013). A framework for institutional adoption and implementation of blended learning in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 18, 4-14.
Grandzol, J. R., & Grandzol, C. J. (2006). Best practices for online business education. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 7(1).
Huang, H. M. (2002). Toward constructivism for adult learners in online learning environments. British Journal of Educational Technology, 33(1), 27-37.
Jonassen, D., Davidson, M., Collins, M., Campbell, J., & Haag, B. B. (1995). Constructivism and computer‐ mediated communication in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 9(2), 7-26.
Kelly, M., Lyng, C., McGrath, M., & Cannon, G. (2009). A multi-method study to determine the effectiveness of, and student attitudes to, online instructional videos for teaching clinical nursing skills. Nurse Education Today, 29(3), 292-300.
Kerres, M., & Witt, C. D. (2003). A didactical framework for the design of blended learning arrangements. Journal of Educational Media, 28(2-3), 101-113.
Köse, U. (2010). A blended learning model supported with Web 2.0 technologies. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 2794-2802.
Laurillard, D. (2012). Teaching as a design science: building pedagogical patterns for learning and technology. New York and London: Routledge.
Lee, A. R. (2018). Korean EFL Students’ Perceptions of Instructor Interaction in a Blended Learning Class. Senior Editor: Paul Robertson, 122.
Lindblom‐Ylänne, S., Trigwell, K., Nevgi, A., & Ashwin, P. (2006). How approaches to teaching are affected by discipline and teaching context. Studies in Higher education, 31(03), 285-298.
Manwaring, K. C., Larsen, R., Graham, C. R., Henrie, C. R., & Halverson, L. R. (2017). Investigating student engagement in blended learning settings using experience sampling and structural equation modeling. The Internet and Higher Education, 35, 21-33
Martin, F., Wang, C., & Sadaf, A. (2018). Student perception of helpfulness of facilitation strategies that enhance instructor presence, connectedness, engagement and learning in online courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 37, 52-65.
McHugh, M. L. (2012). Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic. Biochemia medica: Biochemia medica, 22(3), 276-282.
Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., & Baki, M. (2013). The effectiveness of online and blended learning: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Teachers College Record, 115(3), 1–47.
Mezirow, J. (2008). An overview on transformative learning. In Lifelong learning (pp. 40-54). Routledge.
Milheim, K. L. (2012). Towards a better experience: Examining student needs in the online classroom through Maslow's hierarchy of needs model. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 8(2), 159.
Moore, M. G. (1989). Editorial: Three types of interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1-6.
Moskal, P. D., & Cavanagh, T. B. (2014). Scaling blended learning evaluation beyond the university. Blended learning: Research perspectives, 2, 34-51.
Neumann, R. (2001). Disciplinary differences and university teaching. Studies in Higher Education, 26(2), 135-146.
Neumann, R., Parry, S., & Becher, T. (2002). Teaching and learning in their disciplinary contexts: A conceptual analysis. Studies in Higher Education, 27(4), 405-417.
Ouyang, F., & Scharber, C. (2017). The influences of an experienced instructor's discussion design and facilitation on an online learning community development: A social network analysis study. The Internet and Higher Education, 35, 34-47.
Owston, R., & York, D. N. (2018). The nagging question when designing blended courses: Does the proportion of time devoted to online activities matter? The Internet and Higher Education, 36, 22-32.
Owston, R., York, D., & Malhotra, T. (2019). Blended learning in large enrolment courses: Student perceptions across four different instructional models. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 35(5).
Pelz, B. (2010). (My) three principles of effective online pedagogy. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 14(1), 103-116.
Pratt, D. D. (2002). Good teaching: One size fits all? New directions for adult and continuing education, 2002(93), 5-16.
Ralston-Berg, P. (2010). Do quality standards matter to students? In Paper Presented at the 2nd Annual Quality Matters Conference, Oak Brook, IL.
Shea, P., & Bidjerano, T. (2010). Learning presence: Towards a theory of self-efficacy, self-regulation, and the development of a communities of inquiry in online and blended learning environments. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1721-1731.
Smart, J. C., & Elton, C. F. (1975). Goal orientations of academic departments: A test of Biglan’s model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 580–588.
Smart, J. C., & Ethington, C. A. (1995). Disciplinary and Institutional Differences in Undergraduate Education Goals. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 64, 49-57.
Smeby, J. C. (1996). Disciplinary differences in university teaching. Studies in higher education, 21(1), 69-79.
Smith, G. G., Heindel, A. J., & Torres-Ayala, A. T. (2008). E-learning commodity or community: Disciplinary differences between online courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(3-4), 152-159.
Smyth, S., Houghton, C., Cooney, A., & Casey, D. (2012). Students' experiences of blended learning across a range of postgraduate programmes. Nurse Education Today, 32(4), 464-468.
Spanjers, I. A., Könings, K. D., Leppink, J., Verstegen, D. M., de Jong, N., Czabanowska, K., & van Merriënboer, J. J. (2015). The promised land of blended learning: Quizzes as a moderator. Educational Research Review, 15, 59-7.
Swarat, S., Oliver, P. H., Tran, L., Childers, J. G., Tiwari, B., & Babcock, J. L. (2017). How disciplinary differences shape student learning outcome assessment: A case study. AERA Open, 3(1), 2332858417690112.
Tawafak, R. M., Romli, A. M., & Alsinani, M. J. (2019). Student Assessment Feedback Effectiveness Model for Enhancing Teaching Method and Developing Academic Performance. International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education (IJICTE), 15(3), 75-88.
Thomas, G., & Thorpe, S. (2018). Enhancing the facilitation of online groups in higher education: a review of the literature on face-to-face and online group-facilitation. Interactive Learning Environments, 1-10.
Tsai, C. C. (2009). Conceptions of learning versus conceptions of web-based learning: The differences revealed by college students. Computers & Education, 53(4), 1092-1103.
Tsai, C. W. (2011). Achieving effective learning effects in the blended course: A combined approach of online self-regulated learning and collaborative learning with initiation. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14(9), 505-510.
Twigg, C. A. (2003). Improving learning and reducing costs: New models for online learning. Educause Review, 38(5), 28-38.
Valiathan, P. (2002). Blended learning models. Learning Circuits, Retrieved October 17, 2009 from http//www.learningcircuits.org/2002/aug2002/valiathan.html.
Vo, H. M., Zhu, C., & Diep, N. A. (2017). The effect of blended learning on student performance at course-level in higher education: A meta-analysis. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 53, 17-28.
Wu, J. H., Tennyson, R. D., & Hsia, T. L. (2010). A study of student satisfaction in a blended e-learning system environment. Computers & Education, 55(1), 155-164.
Zhu, Y., Au, W., & Yates, G. (2016). University students' self-control and self-regulated learning in a blended course. The Internet and Higher Education, 30, 54-6.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 82-91.
