Blended Learning Presented by Garth Ferrante

Blended Learning

Presented by: • Garth Ferrante . . . Host • Chris Graber. . Interviewee • Heather Nydam . . . Hostess

WHAT IS BLENDED LEARNING?

Blended learning • Blended learning is a mixture of online and face-to-face learning using a variety of learning resources and communications options available to students and lecturers. • Blended learning mixes e-learning with other more traditional types of learning. • The conveniences of online courses are gained without the loss of face-to-face contact. • This creates a learning environment that is richer than a traditional face-to-face environment or a fully online environment.

POST-SECONDARY LEVEL • Use Web. CT, Black. Board, Canvas, etc. • Considered “Blended” if 30% to 80% on-line • Predicted 80% to 90% of courses will be blended environments (Young, 2002)

What is the Ratio Between On-line Time and Seat Time? • • • Percentage time is undefined Student-centered instruction Increased convenience for students Flexible approach is preferred The “Best of Both Worlds”

OPTIMAL LEARNING • How is the learning ensured? • What teaching methods are used by teachers? • What types of technologies are used? • What kinds of assessments are used by staff?

Evaluation of a Blended Learning Initiative • Also, the vision is that the blended learning model, currently used only during the afterschool credit recovery program, will become an integral part of instructional implementation during the school day in at least three major content areas as well as in career/technical courses offered at the district’s career-technical and thematic schools. • The goal is that, within the context of a blended learning model, teachers will structure and supplement online course content to customize learning experiences and, thereby, create personalized learning opportunities for identified individual students – those who require remediation, those ready for course acceleration, those with specific interests, and/or other. • To achieve this, over the course of the next five years, dedicated time and funding will be needed to support curriculum customization of available online courses by content teachers and supervisors. • Customized course requirements will include tasks such as (but not limited to) modifications of course modules and inclusion of teacher-designed tasks (e. g. , performance task expectations, rubrics, links to multi-media resources, other) to be included within the “Dropbox” feature of each online course.

“Old Wine in New Bottles” How is Blended Learning different? • • Rigorous curriculum Required to complete with fidelity Pre-assessments Target specific areas Instant feedback Data drives instruction Goals are significant

How are Parameters for Blending Learning Programs Established? • • Trial and error Organization Right people in the right places A specific forum

Evaluation of a Blended Learning Initiative • Several gaps in PLATO implementation were documented and are being addressed. • Offering of PLATO courses to the after-school evening credit recovery program, while effective in addressing graduation rates, limited its impact and excluded more direct, focused involvement by daytime staff - teachers, guidance counselors, and administrators. • Through expansion of available licenses commensurate with each high school’s actual student enrollment, student participation in PLATO online courses will begin to be extended throughout the school day to include teacher-facilitated/monitored credit recovery and course remediation and/or acceleration opportunities during the regular school day in addition to continued opportunities for asynchronous learning beyond the school day during the district’s Credit Recovery Program or as part of personalized learning opportunities for select courses. • Inclusion of online courses and individual online course modules during the daytime school program will also provide a more seamless link between students’ progress in their daytime courses and their online coursework; it will involve daytime classroom teachers and counselors (currently a missing component) – not only the hired after-school program staff - in the credit recovery process and, thus, apportion responsibilities for students’ graduation among all stakeholders.

Evaluation of a Blended Learning Initiative GRADUATION & PERSONALIZATION GOALS: Credit Recovery/ Blended Learning • The goal of implementing a blended learning credit recovery system include an increased graduation rate as well as expansion of opportunities for academic enrichment and college and career readiness. • Through the district’s after-school Credit Recovery Program, students who are atrisk for not meeting their graduation requirements are afforded opportunities to regain lost ground by making up failed courses and recovering credit toward graduation. • They do so through enrollment in PLATO which provides personalized credit recovery in the context of standards-based online courses or, depending on student needs, individual course modules which can be accessed anytime and anywhere, thus offering students numerous flexible opportunities to fulfill their credit requirements.

Evaluation of a Blended Learning Initiative • In addition to the vision articulated above intended to expand the blended learning model, other noted gaps have been addressed within the district’s Credit Recovery Program. • E. g. , an aggressive multi-faceted effort was launched to ensure more targeted and effective involvement by the Guidance Department in respect to the district’s graduation goals. • Professional development was provided to guidance staff to illuminate their critical roles in the provision of scheduled updates relative to students’ progress toward graduation. • Expectations and specific tasks were defined, data collection forms were created, and clear protocols and timelines were developed to ensure up-to-date, ongoing data-driven articulation between the guidance departments, the district’s Credit Recovery Program, each school’s administration, and Central Office.

Evaluation of a Blended Learning Initiative • Students progress through the PLATO online learning process by completing course tutorials which rely on multi-media delivery of instruction combined with face to face instruction. • To measure and verify content mastery, students complete the available battery of assessments within the online system - pre and posttests, ongoing progress monitoring within each course module, and unit mastery tests. • Teachers, principals, school-based Credit Recovery administrators, as well as central office stakeholders rely on the program’s reporting tools to monitor student progress and intervene to provide help as needed and ensure that students complete their courses and fulfill their graduation requirements.

Does the teacher still score the open-ended questions and essays? • The teachers need to be doing the assessments • There always needs to be a teacher facilitating the class

POSSIBLE “ROAD BLOCKS” FOR IMPLEMENTATION • • Scheduling Setting (Centralized Location) Data Infrastructure – Plug-ins work – Computers up-to-date – Filtering software is able to access external links

Blended learning • Students are open to select their preferred learning style to some extent • Educators utilize blended learning because they see that students may not be able to manage a fully online course and because they wish to introduce students to technology or because they want to give additional support to weaker students (Raj and Abdallah 2005).

Teachers Responsibility and Accountability • • • Supervisors Credit Recovery/Blended Learning Monitors Programs that provide usage and data reports Digital walk through Physical walk through

Evaluation of a Blended Learning Initiative • Closer monitoring and refinement of “independent study” arrangements is planned over the course of the next two – three years. Inclusion of a board-approved policy to govern “independent study” is among the planned action items.

COMBINED SCHOOL SITES CR Blended Learning Program 2013 TOTAL STUDENT ENROLLEMENT PASS, FAIL, DROPOUT How is the success rate determined? • District graduation rate was increased • These numbers represent only the students with in the Credit Recovery Program 492 109 # Students Enrolled as of July 3 1117 # of Students with passing grade # of Students with failing grade # of Studed who dropped out 826

Students: • Participated in the modules • Increased attendance • Completed course work COMBINED SCHOOL SITES CR Blended Learning Program 2013 STUDENT COMPLETION, PASS, FAIL % Students with failing grade = 12% 109 % Students with passing grade = 88% 826 # Students who completed program 935 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000

Evaluation of a Blended Learning Initiative Guidance Counselors • • As a result of the focus on Guidance roles and procedures in 2012 -2013, one of the most successful changes involving counselor attention to graduation goals was implementation of revised procedures for student enrollment into Credit Recovery Summer School The result was a doubling of enrollment and program completion as compared to previous years • Finally, unrelenting monitoring of students’ progress toward graduation with ongoing involvement of and follow-up by guidance and other stakeholders was implemented and will be expanded. • Toward that end, for the 2013 -2014 school year for the first time, guidance staff dedicated to monitoring the credit recovery after-school program have been hired to service individual school sites; they plan to monitor student progress, provide counseling, contact parents, contribute to routine data collection, and maintain articulation between the after-school and daytime school programs. • Additional funding for counselor-specific PD as well as for expansion of available hours for the credit recovery guidance are needed.

Course Success • • • Determined by the student’s digital literacy Satisfaction of with on-line courses Self-motivation is critical Ability to manage one’s time effectively Ability to work and learn independently Instructors availability (Akkoyunlu and Soylu, 2008)

Face-to-Face “Based on student perceptions, data reveals that more than 60% of students still prefer some face time (Akkoyunlu & Soylu, 2008). ” Why? • Receive answers to questions • Experts view point (Instructor as the expert) • Clarify expectations of assignments, exams, and other requirements • Orient feelings • Uncomfortable sharing ideas in an on-line forum • Needs more support with the on-line forum

K-12 Research for Blended Learning “There is a lack of blended learning research in K-12 environments. Yet, there is evidence that online and blended learning options are becoming increasingly popular with massive opportunities for growth in this market (Picciano & Seaman, 2007; Picciano, Seaman, Shea, & Swan, 2012; Staker et al. , 2011) . ” “There will be a great need for researchers to look at blended learning in K-12 contexts, where adolescent learners have very different needs from adult learners (Cavanaugh, Barbour, & Clark, 2009; Moore, 2007). ”

Common Challenges • Expanding instructional time beyond the school day • Keeping students engaged in their learning • Meeting the needs of diverse learners • Encouraging parental involvement

Shortcomings of Blended Learning • • • Equity Poverty Theft Providing accommodations Digital Divide – Lack of device – Lack of internet

Blended Learning “Students who took all or part of their class online performed better, on average, than those taking the same course through traditional face-to-face instruction. . . ” US Department of Education 2009

Reference • • Akkoyunlu, Buket; Soylu, Meryem Yilmaz. (2008). A Study of Student’s Perceptions in a Blended Learning Environment Base on Different Learning Styles. Educational Technology & Society, 11(1), 183 -193. Delialioğlu, Ö. (2012). Student Engagement in Blended Learning Environments with Lecture-Based and Problem-Based Instructional Approaches. Journal Of Educational Technology & Society, 15(3), 310 -322. Department of education (need to cite) Dziuban, Charles; Hartman, Joel; Moskal, Patsy. Blended Learning. Ecucause Center for Applied Research: Research Bullentin. Volume 2004, Issue 7 Gerbic, P. (2011). Teaching using a blended approach – what does the literature tell us? . Educational Media International, 48(3), 221 -234. doi: 10. 1080/09523987. 2011. 615159 Halverson, L. R. , Graham, C. R. , Spring, K. J. , & Drysdale, J. S. (2012). An analysis of high impact scholarship and publication trends in blended learning. Distance Education, 33(3), 381 -413. doi: 10. 1080/01587919. 2012. 723166 Hyo-Jeong, S. , & Bonk, C. J. (2010). Examining the Roles of Blended Learning Approaches in Computer- Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) Environments: A Delphi Study. Journal Of Educational Technology & Society, 13(3), 189 -200.

Reference • • • Miyazoe, T. , & Anderson, T. (2011). Anonymity in Blended Learning: Who Would You Like to Be? . Journal Of Educational Technology & Society, 14(2), 175 -187. Moe, C. , & Rye, S. (2011). Blended learning: communication, locations and work-life practices. Educational Media International, 48(3), 165 -178. doi: 10. 1080/09523987. 2011. 607320 Pombo, L. , Loureiro, M. , & Moreira, A. (2010). Assessing collaborative work in a higher education blended learning context: strategies and students' perceptions. Educational Media International, 47(3), 217 -229. doi: 10. 1080/09523987. 2010. 518814 Purvis, A. J. , Aspden, L. J. , Bannister, P. W. , & Helm, P. A. (2011). Assessment strategies to support higher level learning in blended delivery. Innovations In Education & Teaching International, 48(1), 91 -100. doi: 10. 1080/14703297. 2010. 543767 (Raj and Abdallah 2005) (need to cite) Young, J. R. (2002) “Hybrid” teaching seeks to end the divide between traditional and online instruction. The Chronicle of Higher Education.