1 Overview of Blended Models and Course Re-design Patricia McGee, Ph.D. The University of Texas at San Antonio Gee - This work is licensed under the Creative Commons NonCommercial Sampling icense. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/nc-sampling+/1.0/
45
Embed
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.
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
1
Overview of Blended Models and Course Re-designPatricia 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 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/nc-sampling+/1.0/
0% Traditional Course with no online technology used — content is delivered in writing or orally.
1 to 29% Web Facilitated
Course which uses web-based technology to facilitate what is essentially a face-to-face course. Uses a course management system (CMS) or web pages to post the syllabus and assignments, for example.
30 to 79% Blended/Hybrid
Course that blends online and face-to-face delivery. Substantial proportion of the content is delivered online, typically uses online discussions, and typically has some face-to-face meetings.
80+% Online A course where most or all of the content is delivered online. Typically have no face-to-face meetings.
1. Creative and stimulating use of electronic content2. Collaborative Learning3. Formative Assessment with integrated feedback4. Electronic Personal Development Planning ePDP
to increase learner’s awareness of themselves, 5. Save time and paper with electronic assignments
• Instructional Tech graduate program– Established, face to face history– 130 students, 3 FT faculty, 5-10 PT faculty– Regional campus (workers and commuters—2+
• 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?
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), 54-75
From http://www.jyukawa.com/research.html
33
CoP Example SME approach
Big Questions
Expert 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/
Unplanned
Evidence
• Explain• Interpret• Apply• Have perspective• Empathize• Have self-
knowledge
Learning Design
37
Overview of Re-design Process
Objectives Assessment Activities/Assignments
38
Backwards Design Applied
• Communicate to multiple audiences
Desired Results
• Blog post (visits/posts?)
• Video (hits/downloads?)
• eZine (posts/subscription?)
Evidence• Observe• Study/
Research• Design• Test/pilot• Revise• Implement
Learning Design
39
Overview of Blend Process
Time Sequence Location
40
Bergtrom, G. (2011). Content vs. learning: An old dichotomy in science courses .Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 15 (1). 33-44
41
Bergtrom, G. (2011). Content vs. learning: An old dichotomy in science courses .Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 15 (1). 33-44
42
Bergtrom, G. (2011). Content vs. learning: An old dichotomy in science courses .Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 15 (1). 33-44
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