Of Online Learning of Online Learning

Technical problems (29%) Flexibility (89%)

Isolation (20%) Opportunities to interact with

peers (17%)

Lack of support (16%) Access to wide resources (11 %)

Lack of student interaction (14%) Effective mode of learning (7%)

Absence of face-to-face Opportunities to interact with

opportunities (14%) tutors (6%)

(p. 54). Moreover, they conclude that " such blended learning approaches have strong advantages that go beyond social presence."

The ECW Evaluation Report (2003) revealed that all online tutors advo­cated a blended approach of face-to-face sessions combined with e-learning. The timing and frequency of live meetings varied somewhat; 100 percent of the tutors wanted a face-to-face induction program, 36 percent felt that face-to-face sessions were important at the start of the course, and 50 percent felt that regular face-to-face meetings should be built into the programs. The students felt that diis blended approach met their needs more successfully and allowed them to learn more effectively. Tutors also noted that students' results improved, as did student satisfaction and retention.

The top five positive and negative features of online learning that we found in our evaluation of the online program between 2001 and 2003 are set out in Table 13.2. We have addressed all the negative aspects of the course identified b\ the students and now offer a blended model of learning, which we judge is meet­ing students' needs more comprehensively.

Our Blend

From our perspective, we view blended learning as a Web-based, higher educa­tion accredited program, delivered over the Internet using a managed learnin, environment, mediated by tutor-led synchronous and asynchronous discussioi. groups and face-to-face meetings. We have adopted a blended learning approaci. combining online programs, face-to-face induction and tutorials, and tutoring sup­port delivered from a network of geographically dispersed campuses. The blend is complex and includes:

E-College Wales, a Case Study of Blended Learning

Off-Line

• Face-to-face inductions involving ICT skills training, icebreaker and social­ization sessions, tutorials, lectures, and PowerPoint presentations

• Student-led face-to-face meetings

• Videoconferences

• Printed student handbook and relevant journal articles

• CD-ROM with instructions on the VLE (Blackboard)

Online

• Electronic library including access to e-books and e-journals

• Interactive generic content

• Interactive customized content

• Online student support including e-tutors, technical support, customer services, and student services

• Asynchronous online collaborative learning using e-mail, discussion boards, and chat facilities

• Synchronous learning through the virtual classroom

Miller, Jones, Packham, and Thomas (2004), tutors at UoG, report on the pos­itive feedback from the students as a result of the introduction of blended learn­ing: " The students felt it simply met their needs and allowed them to learn more effectively. Comments from students included: 'the initial Blackboard face-to-face training was essential for us to find our way around the system and know what to do.' 'We vote with our feet, if we did not want the face to face sessions we would not attend. We did and we still do'" (p. 4).

Similarly staff members who undertook our e-moderating programs provided similar feedback to the undergraduates' feedback. Additional face-to-face sessions bave been very well received, and one of our students, himself a long-serving lec­turer, sums up his feelings: " I have no hesitation in placing on record that I have found this to be the most stimulating course I've undertaken in years."

ConcVusions

At the start of the ECW project in 2000, we concentrated on developing courses online. Since that time, we have learned that a largely online model of learning does not offer enough choices of engagement or enough social contact—thus our move to blended learning.

Our experiences of blended learning are without exception positive and have resulted in the achievement of higher learning outcomes. All of this evidence,

192 The Handbook of Blended Learning

however, could be viewed as post hoc rationalization, opting for a blended approach rather than a major redesign. However, it is important to realize that technology should not be used merely to emulate traditional methods of delivery; the challenge is to identify the gains from applying technology and use these alongside existing best practices in multimodal delivery. It is essential that the technology is not in­corporated into programs uncritically. Many students, especially those age eighteen to twenty-five, will probably not want entirely e-learning courses or study at a vir­tual university. The key features of university life for many young people are the social and recreational activities. In addition, for any age group, sustaining motiva­tion in a virtual environment is problematic. Blended learning offers one solution so that online learning enhances the best of the face-to-face provision.

For many, e-learning is seen as a technical solution to improve teaching. It is commonly viewed as neutral—just another tool in the lecturer's kit bag. This, I believe, is a naive view and hides the extent and complexity of change required at universities (Jones, 2004; Jones & O'Shea, 2004). Technology is not just another way of delivering course content. Blended learning is challenging our education practices and under­lying epistemologies and theories. The design of blended learning needs to be grounded in sound education theory. We need to ensure that we blend technological and peda­gogical advancements. If we design programs online and ignore education theory, we are in danger of leaving learning to chance. Of course, the disadvantages of a blended learning solution, which includes some face-to-face elements, are obvious: a loss of time and location freedom. Nevertheless, we believe that overall, there are great benefits from adopting a blended approach, and the benefits outweigh the costs.

Laurillard (2002) gives valuable advice emphasizing that the first execution of an e-learning program rarely works well. She recommends that we as academic -build a body of knowledge on how we could make best use of technology in learn­ing. There is not enough research evidence on which to base conclusions on the

efficacy of blended (earning, but this case study goes some way to Ш the evidence

gaps. There is clear evidence presented in this case study that a blended solution works better than an entirely computer-mediated environment. The variety of blends can be overwhelming and confusing, but the case study illustrates the suc­cess of combining elements of traditional and computer-mediated delivery.

References

Alexander, S. (2001). E-learning developments and experiences. Education and Training, 45 '(4.

55-63. Balance Learning. (2004, March). Budgets set to soar as coaching gains popularity. Personnel

Today, 1-6. Bonk, C.J. (2003, February). Navigating the myths and monsoons of online learning

strategies and technologies. In Proceedings of the education Without Borders Conference,

Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.

E-College Wales, a Case Study of Blended Learning

Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development. (2004, May). New trends in training and

development. CIPD Impact Report, no. 7. DeLacey, B. J., & Leonard, D. A. (2002). Case study on technology and distance in education

at the Harvard Business School. Educational Technology and Society, 5(2), 13-28. Department for Education and Skills. (2004). Unified e-learning strategy. Retrieved June 27,

2004, from https://www.dfes.gov.uk/elearningstrategy. Durbin, J. (2004). Current usage of training delivery methods. ITT Training, 1-7. Retrieved

June 24, 2004, from www.itskillsresearch.co.uk. E-College Wales. (2003). Evaluation report. Glamorgan: University of Glamorgan, Wales. Flynn, G. (2004, April). How uptake forces re-think for e-university. People Management. Garrison, D., & Anderson, T. (2003). E-learning in the 21st century. London: Routledge Falmer. Higher Education Funding Council England. (2004a). HEFCE e-learning strategy: Consultation

responses and next steps. Retrieved August 2, 2004, from https://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/

circlets/2004/cl09_04/. Higher Education Funding Council England. (2004b). The Centres for Excellence in Teaching and

Learning (CETL). Retrieved June 27, 2004, from https://www.hefce.ac.uk/learning/

tinits/ced/. Inglis, A., Ling, P., & Joosten, V (2002). Delivering digitally. London: Kogan Page. Jones, N. (2004, March). From here to e-ternity. Professorial inaugural lecture, University of

Glamorgan. Jones, N. and O'Shea, J. (2004). Challenging hierarchies. Higher Education, 48(3), 379-395. Laurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking university teaching (2nd ed.). London: Roudedge. Mason, R. (2003). Online learning and supporting students: New possibilities. In A. Tait and

R. Mills (Eds.), Rethinking karner support in distance education: Change and continuity in an international

context. London: Routledge. Miller, C, Jones, P, Packham, G, & Thomas, B. (2004, April). Networked learning, A viable

solution: The case for blended delivery on an on-line learning programme. Paper presented

at the Networked Learning Fourth International Conference, Lancaster University. Morrison, D. (2003a). E-learning strategies: How to get implementation and delivery right first time.

New York: Wiley. Morrison, D. (2003b). The search for the holy recipe. Retrieved June 24, 2004, from

https://www.morrisonco.com/downloads/blended_learning_holy_recipe.pdf. Mullich, J. (2004). A recipe for blended learning. Workforce Management, Training and Development.

Retrieved June 21, 2004, from https://www.workforce.eom/section/l 1/ feature/

23/62/89/236291.html. Newby, H. (2004, June 23). MPs attack e-university bonus payments. Guardian Newspaper, p. 2. Pittinsky, M. (2003, October). Sharing best practices, innovating together. European Blackboard

Conference, Amsterdam. Rossett, A., & Doughs, F. (2004, April). The house blend. People Management, 36-38. Rossett, A., Doughs, E, & Frazee, V (2003). Strategies for building blended learning. Learning

Circuits. Retrieved June 24, 2004, from https://www.learningcircuits.org/2003/jul2003/

rossett.htm. Schooley, C. (2002). Ways to encourage completion of e-learning tasks. Forrester Research. Retrieved

June 27, 2004, from https://www.forrester.com/my/ l„l-0, FF.html. Tait, A., & Mills, R (2003). Rethinking learner support in distance education. London: Routledge Falmer. Thomson and NETg. (2003). The next generation of corporate learning: Achieving the right blend.

Retrieved June 24, 2004, from www.netg.com/NewsAndEvents/PressReleases/

view.asp? PressID^:::: 75#top.

CHAPTER FOURTEEN