Blended Learning:
Updating the Traditional Professional Learning Approach
Sonia Rodriguez
Lamar University
EDLD 5305
Dr. Dwayne Harapnuik
July 7, 2024
Updating the Traditional Professional Learning Approach
A key element of most definitions of blended learning is the ability for a student to have some control over time, place, path and/or pace (US Department of Education, 2015, p 61). Numerous research, studies, and books about blended learning demonstrate the benefits of student engagement, personalized learning, and students' achievement whether implemented with learners at the elementary, middle school, high school, university, or corporation level. To this day some professional learning takes place in a traditional face-to-face setting or factory model that has been around for a long time to train and keep educators updated on best practices. The traditional method has been the transfer of information from a teacher to a diverse student population instead of being student-centered. There are limitations to the traditional approach. It limits us on how we can support struggling learners, and meet diverse learning needs and the teacher-to-student ratio limits the delivery of high-quality personalized learning (The Clayton Christensen Institute & Public Impact, 2018). Additionally, Horn & Staker (2015), “Whole group lectures offers little opportunity for students to form relationships with each other or with the teacher during this time” (p. 144).
In the digital age, we are currently in, technology continues to evolve and improve, and the conventional form of delivering access will become less and less effective and attractive to our diverse learners. There is an overabundance of literature to show the effectiveness of blended learning. It has proven to increase student engagement, student achievement, and full awareness of the benefits of personalized learning. “Blended learning is an important support for transforming teaching and learning to increase individual student performance” (US Department of Education, 2015, p 62).
The literature review analyzes the effectiveness of blended learning, specifically the impact student engagement and personalized learning have on student achievement.
Benefits of Blended Learning
Face-to-face professional learning that used to be driven by the teacher can now be driven by the learner. Personalized learning keeps the learner in mind along with their individualized needs. With the amount of content available online, technology allows limitless opportunities for students to dig deeper and be engaged on the topic they are learning. Blended learning allows students to foster a growth mindset. According to Dweck (2006), “The growth mindset is the belief that abilities can be cultivated” (p. 50). Blended learning engages the learner in a healthy learning environment where multiple opportunities are provided to cultivate their abilities. She also explains, “The growth mindset is based on the belief that your basic qualities are things you can cultivate through efforts…….-everyone can change and grow through application and experience” (p7); which is exactly what blended learning will offer.
A study intended to compare face-to-face, e-learning, and blended learning to teach a local anesthesia course proved that the group that participated in blended learning showed significantly better results in theoretical knowledge and expressed higher satisfaction than the other two groups (Bock et al., 2021). The experimental outcome of a study of Students' Practices of 21st Century Skills between Conventional Learning and Blended Learning, “revealed the significant skill practice performed by students in blended learning classes compared to the counterparts in conventional programs”(Hadiyanto et al., 2021). Blended learning allows students to optimize 21st-century skills like communication and problem-solving skills.
Based on GSV advisors, one should consider the “return on education (ROE) as it is critical when analyzing the financial health of the education sector. Return of education should offer one or all of the following:( 1) Drive down costs for learners and/or institutions; (2) increase student and/or instructor access to education; (3) improve learning outcomes; and (4) increase “capacity” of instruction and instructors.” (Horn & Staker, 2015, p.109 )
It makes sense to maximize the use of our technology and one way is using it effectively through blended learning as this model allows us to create a healthy learning environment that fosters personalized learning and increases student engagement.
Student Engagement
Motivation and engagement are essential for a healthy, efficient, and productive learning environment. Nateil Carby describes two different perspectives on student engagement. One conceptualizes student engagement to include behavioral which references social and academic; cognitive which references concepts and deep learning; and emotional which references relationships and reactions to those involved. The second perspective includes vigor relating to high energy and mental resilience; dedication referring to being involved intensely in one's work; and absorption which references to being concentrated and involved in one's work (Carby, 2023).
Christenson et al. (2012) summarized student engagement by stating that “engaged students do more than attend or perform academically; they also put forth effort, persist, self-regulate their behavior toward goals, challenge themselves to exceed, and enjoy challenges and learning” (p. v).
In the summer of 2011, Michael and Susan Dell Foundation initiated an investment to include direct investment to 5 charter-managed organizations that were practicing blended learning. The investment included schools from K-12th grade. One of the questions asked during the study was: ”How can schools best understand and channel student engagement?” As blended learning was implemented the study concluded that teachers in every school profiled have noticed an increase in student excitement and ownership over their own learning in a blended model (Bernatek et al., 2012). Schools and organizations can best channel student engagement by adopting a blended learning approach. In a blended learning model the teacher promotes student engagement, allocates appropriate resources to meet learning outcomes, and the student becomes a self-learner.
Dweck (2006) wrote “Robert Sternber, the present-day guru of intelligence, writes that the major factor in whether people achieve expertise “is not some fixed prior ability, but purposeful engagement.” (5) She also states that: “….for no matter what your ability is, effort is what ignites that ability and turns it into accomplishment” (p 41). This demonstrates that when students are engaged in their learning, they will also increase their achievement.
Creating Significant Learning Environment (CSLE) foundations stem back from research on Inquisitivism in the 1990’s. A learner-centered active learning approach allows the learner to have ( C ) Choice, ( O ) Owership, ( V ) Voice through an ( A ) Authentic learning environment. This is known as COVA (Harrapnuik, 2022b). Harapnuik has eloquently written about how COVA plus CSLE approach promotes the growth mindset and the construction of a learning environment that fosters experimentation and collaboration (Harapnuik, 2018, 2022a).
The sit-and-get approach or the one-size-fits-all traditional method needs to be updated. The teacher can no longer just transfer information in a fixed time and place setting. They must now embrace the role of a teacher, mentor, facilitator, and coach to engage the learner through a blended learning approach where time, path, pace, and space are flexible (Harapnuik, 2015; Priest, 2016). A higher education article examined teacher strategies to foster student engagement and explained that teachers use synchronous and asynchronous learning as a strategy to get students engaged in blended learning. The article mentioned that students perceived added value by engaging in content synchronously and asynchronously. Students were able to engage and deepen the content learned asynchronously when they interacted with peers and teachers synchronously. This strategy fostered positive behavioral and emotional engagement and stimulated cognitive engagement (Heilporn et al., 2021). Both synchronous and asynchronous are blended into a seamless, integrated learning experience where learning in each environment informs and supports the other (US Department of Education, 2015, p 61).
Another way to engage students is through reflection. Different studies have tried; self-reflection, computer prompts, formative online self-assessment, self-assessment questions, question prompts, and self-regulation learning strategies. The US Department of Education identified over 1,000 studies on blended learning that included K-12 grades, medical training, and higher education. The finding of those studies is reflected in the statement below: Overall, the available research evidence suggests that promoting self-reflection, self-regulation, and self-monitoring leads to more positive online learning outcomes (US Department of Education, 2010, p 45). This study also demonstrated that the number of concepts learned increased and students performed better overall when asked to reflect on their learning.
Personalized Learning
COVID forced us to use technology to deliver content differently and exposed us to the possibilities we had overlooked in the past. We were forced to use synchronous and asynchronous settings to learn and to realize that the sit-and-get approach in a face-to-face setting is not the only option for learning. COVID helped us to understand that technology can be used for learning instead of just using technology to access information and utilize online programs.
Harrapnuik discusses the importance of focusing on a learner-centered active approach and the importance of creating authentic learning opportunities where the learner has a choice, takes ownership, and has a voice (2018). With this approach, students will not just get by but thrive. It allows to fulfill the areas of need through an engaging healthy learning environment where the learners feel connected with themselves, the teacher, and their peer or colleagues due to engagement. It provides the ability to meet the needs of diverse learners. Learners are able to set their own pace, better-retained information, and their diverse needs are met. The literature above demonstrates that blended learning is a better method to increase student engagement and personalize K-12 grade and adult learning authentically in a way that incorporates the best of online and face-to-face settings.
Technology can be used to accommodate personalized learning by monitoring progress, personalizing paths, providing feedback, and allowing students to move at their own pace (Dabae et al, (2019). The OECD (2015) report included that according to Hatti and Yates (2013) assessments on computer-based instruction: computers were particularly effective when used to extend study time and practice when used to allow students to assume control over the learning situation (e.g. by individualizing the pace with which new material is introduced), and when used to support collaborative learning (p. 163). The US Department of Education explained the following:
Individualization refers to instruction where the pace is adjusted to meet the needs of individual learners, allowing them to progress through the material at different speeds. Personalization refers to instruction that is paced to learning needs and tailored to both learning preferences and specific interests of different learners. Personalization puts students at the center, empowers them to take control of their learning, and offers engaging learning experiences for all learners. (2015, p. 64)
Personalized and targeted instruction equals higher student engagement and achievement as it is tailored to individual students' needs. Personalized learning permits student agency to take place. It allows students to embrace their learning style in relation to place, pace, time, and space, creating a positive impact on student achievement. Four different studies had evidence to prove that when students have control of their learning they have higher learning gains than traditional instructor-directed instruction (US Department of Education, 2010, p. 41).
After 8 pioneering district, charter, private schools, and school networks adopted blended learning, The Clayton Christensen Institute & Public Impact, reported the following shifts in student experience:
As schools adopted these new approaches, the student experience changed. With staffing arrangements that supported increased small-group and online study, students had more opportunities to work on individualized, self-paced instruction. Schools also supported student engagement through personal goal-setting with teachers and providing more choices in where and how they learned. Additionally, these arrangements allowed schools to place a premium on enabling multiple adults to form strong relationships with students. (2018, p. 4)
Having a choice is a critical part of a healthy learning environment. According to The Clayton Christensen Institute & Public Impact (2018), “Choices kept students motivated—without lowering the bar of expectations—and taught students crucial skills of responsibility, time management, and planning” (p. 20). Personalized learning allows the needs and learning styles of learners to be met. Learners have the opportunity to learn on their own as well as collaborate and connect with colleagues. Blended learning offers the opportunity to fulfill one's learning preferences, unlike the traditional approach to learning. As students are provided with a method that supports their learning preferences they become self-learners and learn to decide for themselves where their efforts toward change would be most valuable (Dweck, 2006, p. 51). Reinforcement of learning is consistent and information is better retained in a way that is convenient and effective.
Blended learning also allows to personalize feedback. When analyzing personalized feedback an article concluded that through student-centered approaches, student achievement and engagement increase, and at the same time it satisfies students’ basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness (Carby, 2023). Personalized learning allows the learner to increase achievement in the area they are learning.
The traditional approach limits our ability to meet the needs of diverse learners.
As mentioned above together CSLE and COVA allow us to construct a healthy blended learning environment. It will increase student engagement and address personalized learning which causes an increase in student achievement. A teacher may help the student, but it is the student who must do the learning. If learning is to take place, knowledge must grow in the students' mind (Adler, 1972; Harrapnuik).
Conclusion
The literature supports that the components of blended learning provide better opportunities to implement purposeful and intentional learning for Kinder through college students as well as adults. Learners will take the lead in their learning as they will actively participate and collaborate in a learning environment. Creating a blended learning environment allows students to have agency that increases student engagement therefore increasing student achievement. “With the right mindset and the right teaching, people are capable of a lot more than we think” (Dweck, 2006, p. 64). The opportunity exists to leverage technology, resources, and staff to enhance learning from elementary to adult learners.
As explained by Horn & Staker (2015):
The most successful blended programs generally begin in response to a desire to (1) boost student achievement and quality of life through personalization, (2) provide access to out-of-reach courses and opportunities, (3) improve a school system’s financial health, or (4) a combination of all thee. Sometimes schools discover an immediate need or problem related to these areas that nudges them toward blended learning; in other cases, they spot an opportunity and decide to go for it. (p.98)
When we ask, “How will they learn best.” Blended learning provides the freedom to transform instructional practices. Why ignore the opportunity to improve on what we have? For all the evidence available on blended learning, now is the time to go for it. The school must create an experience for the student to find joy in learning (Horn & Staker, 2015, p143). “The great teachers believe in the growth of the intellect and talent, and they are fascinated with the process of learning” (Dweck, 2006, p. 188). An online Blended Coaching model allows for the opportunity to engage adults in the process of upskilling through authentic learning experiences.
References
Adler, M. J., & Van Doren, C. (1972). How to read a book: The Classic Guide to Intelligent Reading. New York, NY: Touchstone.
Bernatek B., Cohen J., Hanlon J. & Wilka M. (2012). Blended Learning in Practice: Case Studies from Leading Schools. Educause. https://library.educause.edu/resources/2012/9/blended-learning-in-practice-case-studies-from-leading-schools
Bock, A., Kniha, K., Goloborodko, E. et al. (2021). Effectiveness of face-to-face, blended and e-learning in teaching the application of local anaesthesia: a randomised study. BMC Med Educ 21, 137. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-021-02569-z.
Carby, N. (2023). Personalized Feedback in a Virtual Learning Environment. Journal of Educational Supervision, v6 n1 Article 3 p36-44. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1386430
Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. Random House.
Hadiyanto, H., Failasofah, F., Armiwati, A., Abrar, M., & Thabran, Y. (2021). Students’Practices of 21st Century Skills between Conventional learning and Blended Learning. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 18(3). https://doi.org/10.53761/1.18.3.7
Harapnuik, D. (2018). COVA. Harapnuik.org. https://www.harapnuik.org/?page_id=699
Harapnuik. D. COVA+CSLE Mindset vs Traditional. Harapnuik.org. https://www.harapnuik.org/?page_id=7007
Harapnuik, D. (2022a). CSLE+COVA vs Traditional. Harapnuik.org. https://www.harapnuik.org/?page_id=7143
Harapnuik, D. (2022b). CSLE. Harapnuik.org. https://www.harapnuik.org/?page_id=849
Harapnuik, D. Digital Learning and Leading. Harapnuik.org. https://www.harapnuik.org/?page_id=7012
Harapnuik, D. (2019). Research. Harapnuik.org. https://www.harapnuik.org/?page_id=7079
Heilporn, G., Lakhal, S. & Bélisle, M. (2021). An examination of teachers’ strategies to foster student engagement in blended learning in higher education. Int J Educ Technol High Educ 18, 25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00260-3
Horn, M.B. & Staker, H. (2015). Blended: Using Disruptive Innovation to Improve School. Jossey-Vass.
Lee, D., Huh, Y., Lin, C. Y., & Reigeluth, C. M. (2018). Technology functions for personalized learning in learner-centered schools. Educational Technology Research and Development, AECT 66(5), 1269–1302. http://doi:10.1007/s11423-018-9615-9
OECD (2015), Students, Computers and Learning: Making the Connection, OECD Publishing, Paris. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264239555-en
The Clayton Christensen Institute & Public Impact, (2018). Innovative Staffing to Personalize Learning: How New Teaching Roles and Blended Learning Help Students Succeed. https://www.christenseninstitute.org/publication/staffing/?_gl=1*9j3vbq*_up*MQ..*_ga*Nzc5MjMzNTQ0LjE3MTk4NzM4Njc.*_ga_EWFPWR53QK*MTcxOTg3Mzg2Ni4xLjEuMTcxOTg3Mzk1NS4wLjAuMA..
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology, (2015, April). Ed Tech Developer’s Guide, Washington, D.C. http://tech.ed.gov