the HyFlex model for the fall… reflects a rift between administrators and professors, who are raising alarms over the health risks of teaching in person, and about the logistical, technical, and pedagogical complications of the model itself. Search HyFlex on Facebook and Twitter and you’ll come across comments like this one: “Whoever the hell thought of this is a bean counter, not an educator, and an idiot.”
Teaching experts and others familiar with hybrid teaching say that HyFlex can work, but it requires effective technology, careful planning, instructional support, and creative course design.
“If HyFlex is part of the plan, it has to be done with will faculty participation,” says Brian Beatty, an associate professor of instructional technologies at San Francisco State, who created the model. “Otherwise, if it’s top down and the administration is saying, We’re doing this, then the faculty are saying, But why are we doing this?”
Much of what bothers professors about the push for HyFlex is that so many details about its mechanics remain ill defined. And assumptions about its value seem rooted in a particular idea of teaching, one where the professor stands at the front of a classroom and lectures.
“We are the ones holding the bag if this does not work, or if it’s chaos,” says Michelle Miller, a psychology professor at Northern Arizona University and author of Minds Online: Teaching Effectively With Technology.
Miller is a fan of the original HyFlex model from San Francisco State, but says that colleges need to be mindful that the conditions under which it’s now being adapted — quickly, at scale, and without giving students much choice — will limit its effectiveness.
To work effectively, she says, hybrid teaching requires a lot of support, such as having teaching assistants help manage the complexities of working simultaneously with two different audiences. Otherwise it risks becoming a “lecture-centric, passive consumption view of learning.” That goes against years of hard work faculty members have been doing to make their classrooms more inclusive, active, and engaged.
To help think through pedagogical challenges, faculty groups are testing out teaching strategies, some departments meet weekly to discuss course design, and a student-leadership team is providing feedback and creating online tools to help their peers learn effectively online. Even so, the process has been challenging and frustrating at times for faculty members. Professors are both looking for templates and wanting to maintain control over their courses, which inevitably creates tension with the administration.
more on hyflex in this IMS blog
Assessment is STEM courses (and how they integrated in LMS:
More on assessment in this IMS blog
Critical Factors for Implementing Blended Learning in Higher Education.
Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318191000_Critical_Factors_for_Implementing_Blended_Learning_in_Higher_Education [accessed Jul 6, 2017].
Definition of Blended learning
Blended learning is in one dimension broadly defined as “The convergence of online and face-to-face Education” as in the study by Watson (2008). At the same time it is important to also include the dimension of technology and media use as it has been depicted in the multimodal conceptual model in Figure 1 below. This conceptual model was proposed and presented in an article published by Picciano (2009). Critical Factors for Implementing Blended Learning in Higher Education.
online face to face hybrid
Several studies that argue for the need to focus on pedagogy and learning objectives and not solely on technology (Hoffinan, 2006; Garrison & Vaughan, 2008; Al amm ary et al., 2014; McGee & Reis, 2012; Shand, Glassett Farrelly & Costa, 2016). Other findings in this study are that technology still is a critical issue (So & Brush, 2008; Fleming, Becker & Newton, 2017), not least in developing regions (AI Busaidi & Al-Shihi, 2012; Raphae1 & Mtebe, 2016), and also the more positive idea of technology as a supporting factor for innovative didactics and instructional design to satisfy the needs in heterogeneous student groups (Picciano, 2009). Critical Factors for Implementing Blended Learning in Higher Education.
- didactics – pedagogy, instructional design and the teacher role
- Course outcomes – learning outcomes and learner satisfaction
- collaboration and social presence
- course design
- the heritage from technology enhanced distance courses
- multimodal overload
- trends and hypes
Blended learning perspectives
- the university perspective
- the Learner perspective
- the Teacher perspective
- the Global perspective
more on blended learning in this IMS blog
Dr. Baiyun Chen, OLC Institute faculty for the Blended Learning Mastery Series: Research into Practice, joins us to discuss the future of blended learning in higher education
Insights from the Field: The Future of Blended Learning
The design of blended learning curriculum will be more diversified and personalized with the integration of creative in-class active learning strategies and innovative educational technologies, such as adaptive learning, virtual reality, mobile technologies
Quality assurance is the biggest challenge with implementing blended learning in the higher education environment today. I would propose institutions to adopt evidence-based standards for course evaluations. For instance, the OLC Quality Scorecard for Blended Learning Programs
more on blended learning in this IMS blog
In 2007 The Sloan Consortium ( presently the Online Learning Consortium) asserted that when 30-79% of class content is available online that is a blended learning class.
entire report here: http://www.onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports/blending-in.pdf
Choice within Online Content
Another often referenced definer of Blended Learning is The Christensen Institute. Student control of Time, Place, and Path are important in this definition.
more on blended learning in this IMS blog:
more on online learning in this IMS blog
Getting Students more involved in classroom presentations and assessing their interest is always part of an educator’s goal. Student Response Systems (SRS), also called audience response systems or more commonly “clickers,” have been around in university lecture halls in one form or another for more than two decades.
Blended Learning Course Design: A Boot Camp for Instructors
July 29 – 30, 2013
This intensive two-day workshop offers one-to-one instruction and consultation from top innovators in blended learning. It’s a hands-on, working workshop. You bring a syllabus, exams, other course materials, and a computer. You leave with an action plan for a blended course that will keep you on the cutting edge of pedagogy.
Through this process, you will:
– Take one of your existing face-to-face courses and convert it into a blended format
– Feel comfortable and confident with the technology so that IT becomes an aid rather than a barrier to communicating with your students
– Learn the most pedagogically effective ways to blend instructional technology, course content, and course activities to promote interaction of students with each other, the instructor, and the content
You will finish with an understanding of how to balance what happens before class, what happens in class, and what happens after class. You will learn how to organize your own Learning Management System (LMS), and you will be exposed to the very best technology tools to support student learning.
Topics explored during this event include course design principles, pedagogical considerations, technology how-to’s, and student engagement strategies.
LEARN MORE AT http://bit.ly/12V6NzN