Transcript The Great Debate – F2F, WWW, or Blended

Da jia hao!
The Great Debate – F2F,
WWW, or Blended
ETIF – Xuzhou
August 18-19, 2009
Contributors:
Cheng-Chang “Sam” Pan
Mike Sullivan
Glenda Gunter
Robert Kenny
Richard “Doc C” Cornell
Agenda
Introduction of the main ideas
 Advocate of Face-To-Face Instruction
 Advocate of Web-based Instruction
 Advocate of Blended Instruction
 Audience Vote By Format
 Summary

Where we began
Plato, Socrates, Confucius
 Traveling teachers
 Schools as “factories”
 Influence of Dewey, Piaget, Rogers
 Influence of Skinner, Gagne, Mager
 Influence of Technology Infusion
 Influence of Constructivism
 Human Performance (Inputs/Outputs)
 Today’s generations are different!

A Personal Aside







1962:First distance learning class (SUNYBrockport)
1963: Impact of Don Ely and others
1963-1992: Media-based instructor in
every class
1987: Goodbye typewriter, Hello PC
1994: Taught satellite-carried class with
multiple off-site sections
1994-2003: Taught mixed-mode classes
2004-present: Teach WWW classes with
live chats using Blackboard Wimba (2008
and 2009 on-location in Taiwan & China)
Three Advocated
Formats…other than televised
instruction

Face-to-Face Instruction
• “If it works, why change anything?

WWW-based Instruction
• “Any time, any place”

Blended Instruction
• “Now we can use multiple methods to
make it better!”
Ground Rules for Teams




Each advocate team had 20 minutes to
state their case.
Opponents rebut by team for maximum of
5 minutes following each presentation.
After all presentations vote of audience
taken as to format with audience
comments, 2 minute limit for each
comment.
Summary and Conclusions
An Informal Poll
F2F ???
 WWW ???
 Blended ???

Then the Games Began!

Face-to-Face Instruction
Face to Face (f2f)
Still primary and most efficient way
to deliver instruction.
 In some cases, may be only solution.
 A mistake to think that e-learning is
best solution in all situations.

1. Found
online learning to be
less effective:
Online Courses at UCF

Compared the effectiveness of face-toface, blended, and fully online courses
from 2001 to 2003.
• Success rates
• Retention rates
• Student satisfaction

Also looked at faculty satisfaction with
blended courses. - Dziuban, Hartman, Juge, Moskal, & Sorg,
2006; Dziuban, Hartman, & Moskal, 2004
2. Found online learning to be less
effective:
•
•
•
Students under-prepared
Disappointment over lack of social
presence.
Resulting feeling of isolation.
-
•
(Alonso, Lopez, Manrique & Vines, 2005)
Takes a special learning/cognitive type
-
•
(Scheick, 2007)
Requires different types of teaching
skills
-
(Kendal & Oaks, 1992)
3. Found online learning to be less
effective:
•
•
•
In an informal case study at UCF, two
modes were tried in same classroom
section….
Instructors found it to be a minor
nightmare to change teaching styles.
Online students disliked course content
more.
4. Found online learning to be less
effective:
•
•
•
•
Students dislike lack of personal
approach.
Personal tutoring is more difficult.
New Web 2.0 technologies not fully
integrated.
Difficult for visual learner.
5. Found online learning to be less
effective:
•
Virtual field trip study, students
displayed, expressed little (if any)
discernible results in vocabulary than a
traditional classroom.
(Sanchez, 2006)
•
On the other hand, VFT’s more effective
as a review for real ones.
(Spicer & Stratford, 2001)
WWW-Based Instruction
Time
Distance
Here / Now
Where is your future?
Why D. E.?
•Non-instructional reasons
•Instructional reasons
Non-Instructional
•Ecological
•Economical
•Health-related
Carbon footprint
21 Million Barrels A Day
No Babysitting
D.E. Classes Filled Up Quick
Students Save Time/Money
State Government Mandates
No Contagious Diseases
Swine Flu Epidemic
Instructional
HPL/Tools
Better Tools Better Environment

Blended Instruction
What is Blended Learning?


Blended learning refers to instructional
events that combine aspects of online
and face-to-face instruction.
Uses the best of both worlds.
- Rooney, 2003; Graham, 2006
Benefits of Blended Learning
Enhanced learning outcomes
 Improved access to programs and
resources
 Increased cost-effectiveness

- Sloan-C View, May, 2005
What Does Research
Have to Say about
Blended Learning?
Pew Grants in Course Redesign
using Information Technology


Improved student learning in 19 of the
30 projects
Other outcomes
• Increased course completion rates
• Improved retention
• Better student attitudes toward the subject
matter
• Increased student satisfaction

Cost reduction by 40% on average
- Heterick & Twigg (2003)
Sense of Community in
Blended Courses (Rovai & Jordan, 2004)

Blended courses produce a stronger
sense of community among students
than either traditional or fully online
courses.
Tradtional
course *
Blended
course **
Fully
online
course
Connectedness
30.78
34.91
28.83
Learning
34.03
36.17
33.01
Blended Learning and Performance:
A Thomson NETg Study

Compared the performance of learners
among three groups who took;
1. Blended courses
2. E-learning courses
3. No training (control group)

Results
• Group 1 showed a 30% increase in accuracy
of performance over Group 2.
• 159% more accuracy than the untrained
Control group (Group 2: 99%).
- Thomson NET, 2003
Blended Learning Results in
the Military Settings (Snipes, 2005)


Leadership development program
Delivered to more than 30,000 learners a year

Study by the Center for Naval Analysis
• 44% improvement in knowledge retention
• A statistically significant impact on sustained
behavioral changes
• Individual on-the-job performance
improvement by 7%
• Cost 94% less than traditional classroom
training and was completed in 1/10 of time
Growth of Enrollment in
Blended Courses - UCF
Source: Dziuban, Hartman, & Moskal (2004)
Projected Growth of Blended
Learning in Higher Education
Percent of Student Learning that is Blended
70
Percent of Respondents
60
50
40
2003
2006
2013
30
20
10
0
None
20% or 21 to 40% 41 to 60% 61 to 80%
81 to
less of of student of student of student 100% of
student
learning learning learning
student
learning
learning
Source: Kim & Bonk (2006)
Blended Learning in Corporate
Training Settings

Training delivery methods
• Classroom training: 62 percent
• Blended: 34-37 percent
• All online: 1-4 percent
- Training Magazine, 2006
“Online methods are mainly used in conjunction with other
modalities in a “blended” learning format – very few training
programs rely exclusively on online delivery.” (Training Magazine,
2006)
Corporate Blended Learning:
International Trends
Is your organization using blended learning as part of its employee
training?
33.08
35.00
27.99
30.00
25.00
21.26
20.00
15.00
10.00
9.43
8.23
5.00
0.00
No, it is not
something that
we have
considered.
No, but we are
considering using
it.
Yes, we have
recently started
using it.
Yes, we have Not sure. What is
been using it for blended learning?
more than 2
years now.
Source: Kim, Bonk, Teng, Son, Zeng, & Oh (2006)
How Important is Blended
Learning?
How important is blended learning for the strategic
planning for training and development in your organization
for the next few years?
45.00
40.00
35.00
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
42.17
25.24
23.80
6.87
1.92
Very Important
Important
Neutral
Not important
Source: Kim et al. (2006)
Not important
at all
Most Significant Issue or
Problem with Blended Learning?
(Kim et al., 2006)
Issues
Response
Ratios (%)
1
Lack of understanding of what blended
learning really is
15.1
2
Insufficient management support and
commitment
11.4
3
Boring and low quality content
10.1
4
Learners lacking self-regulated learning
skills
9.8
5
Learner resistance / hesitancy
8.8
6
Fast changing technology
8.5
7
Organizational / cultural resistance
6.8
Implications for Instructional
Design & Technology

Instructional designers need pedagogical
and technical competencies for both faceto-face and online learning environments.

Understanding emerging instructional
strategies and technologies for;
• Individualized learning
• On-demand learning
• Authentic learning
- Kim et al., 2006
Emerging Technologies for
Blended Learning
In your organization, which one of the following emerging
technologies will most greatly impact the delivery of blended
learning during the next few years?
Knowledge Management Tools
Digital Libraries and Content Repositories
(learning content management tools)
Online Simulations
Webcasting and Video Streaming
Cell Phones and Other Mobile and Handheld
Technologies
Wireless Technologies
Intelligent Agents
Pod Casting and iPods
Electronic Books
Weblogs (i.e., blogs) and Online Diaries
Massive Multiplayer Online Gaming
Wikis
Language Training and Support Tools
0.00
5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00
Source: Kim et al. (2006)
Summary
F-2F
 WWW
 Blended

Audience Participation

Audience Vote for format of choice
On behalf of Dr. Phil
Harris, Executive Director
AECT
I invite you to attend our
annual conference in
Louisville, Kentucky
October 27-31, 2009!
Welcome to UCF as well!
http://insttech.education.ucf.
edu
Thank you for your kind
attention!
Thanks to Virtual
Presenters
Thanks to You
I will be happy to answer any
questions if time permits