A Tale of Two Cities

Geraldine Lefoe, John G. Hedberg

rom an examination of two universities in different cities, this chapter discusses the ideas that they have emphasized in blended learning and the lessons that can be drawn for others moving into the field and seeking to form a successful implementation.

The past decade has seen unprecedented change in higher education throughout the world. Predictions of wholesale moves to totally online degrees, greeted initially with enthusiasm and by some with total skepticism, have proved elusive. The recent closure of the U.K. eUniversities Worldwide (UKeU) fol­lows earlier failures of such schemes in the United States, where the low numbers of enrolled students indicate that this is not always what the majority of stu­dents seek for their university education. When reporting on the closure of the UKeU, the funding body noted that universities now favored a blended approach " involving a mixture of IT, traditional, work-based and distance learning to meet the diverse needs of students" (Higher Education Funding Council for England, 2004). While some distance education universities and their partners have achieved moderate success in the area, many campus-based universities, espe­cially in Australia, have taken a more conservative approach, opting to increase student numbers through the expansion of their structures through the creation of international partnerships.

Many higher education institutions have been bombarded with change efforts, driven by the new market economy that found universities competing for funds

The Handbook of Blended Learning

in a changed resource environment (Adams, 2002). Universities looked beyond their walls for ways to increase funds and became more entrepreneurial in their outlook through the inclusion of full fee-paying international students and more vocationally oriented postgraduate courses to raise revenue (Gallagher, 2000). They looked offshore, forming relationships with other institutions to provide a university education in partnership or establishing their own offshore campuses.

Universities worldwide were finding it difficult to meet the challenge of decreased funding from government sources with requirements to improve access to education and the quality of the educational experience, pressures, and agendas supported by government reports (National Board of Employment Education and Training, 1996). While attempting to reduce costs created a challenge for universities, many believed this could be met by improving teaching and learning, especially with information and communication technologies (Yetton & Associates, 1997).

However, the history of technological innovation in higher education (Hedberg & McNamara, 2002) demonstrates that technological solutions do not always address pedagogical needs of learners and teachers. The educational tech­nology literature supports the view that pedagogy, not technology, should deter­mine how it is best used (Collis & Moonen, 2001; Laurillard, 2002). As the use of technology matures in the learning environment in higher education, a more pragmatic approach is being demonstrated. Universities are combining the best features of distance and face-to-face learning environments to produce blended learning environments supported by the use of technology.

An effective blended learning environment takes a learning design approach that looks at the learning goals and aligns them with teaching and learning activities and assessments, thereby ensuring the integration and appropriate use of technology (Boud & Prosser, 2002). This integration can also be reflected in the wider university through, for example, the provision of student portals where students can manage and interact with all administrative areas, including subject choice, timetable changes, and personal information management (Cornford & Pollock, 2003).

This chapter examines two examples of blended learning implementation in two vastly different universities. One is a regional university in Australia; the other is one of the three state-funded universities in Singapore.

Background to Each Context

The Australian university adopted a blended approach to meet the requirements of institutional change that resulted in a radical change to the nature of the student body. The composition changed from a largely local body of students, attending

Blending On and Off Campus

the local campus and coming straight from high school, to one that included a diverse range of students, in a number of locations, and a significant increase in the percentage of mature-age and international students. We provide an overview of the strategic changes this university made to pedagogy and an example of implementation of a new degree developed specifically for students located at a satellite campus and access centers. From this case study, we identify aspects of blended learning that support and challenge improvements for student learning.

In contrast, the Singapore institution adopted the technologies as part of a major government initiative to quickly develop the technical expertise of its teachers and students. The employment of information and communication technologies in blended ways was seen as a mechanism by which the university would be able to participate in global alliances and demonstrate levels of sophistication in modern teaching approaches. From these contexts, we develop some broader ideas that are still proving elusive as the institution attempts to change its teaching strategies and create greater invention and challenge in the curriculum. We use the Singapore institution by way of a contrasting and matching comparison as we explore the blended learning context.

Government imperatives to increase access to higher education for rural and remote students in Australia provided a large pool of money for the development of satellite campuses and access centers. Many universities took advantage of this opportunity with the resultant expansion to multicampus institutions. The use of technology combined with a desire for increased flexibility for students, saw a blended approach to teaching and learning underpin many of the developments, combin­ing strategies from distance and traditional education with many of the latest tech­nological developments. Several studies, in fact, documented the challenges in establishing these new learning environments (Chalmers, 1999; Taylor, 1999).

In Singapore, it was a series of government initiatives that challenged the whole of the educational sector over two separate five-year master plans to review their approaches to teaching and learning and employ the technologies in more creative and engaging ways. Thus, the emphasis was on the modernization of educational practice, some improvement to the learning experience for the student often taught in large classes, and the use of the most modern tools to familiarize a technically oriented workforce.

Blended Learning in Wollongong

The University of Wollongong is a regional university in southeastern Australia with approximately twenty thousand students. It includes the main campus in Wollongong, a campus in Dubai in the United Arab Emirates, a satellite campus

'

The Handbook of Blended Learning

about one hour from Wollongong, and four access centers for students (up to four hours' drive from the main campus). The university received substantial govern­ment funding to establish the satellite campus and centers to promote access to education for students in remote and regional areas. Blended learning involved a number of early adopters in the mid-1990s, but by 2000, the impetus for change was driven by the needs of the Australian and overseas students studying away

from the main campus.

At the University of Wollongong, approximately 35 percent are international students, with two-thirds of this group studying on the Wollongong campus and the rest studying in their homeland through partner universities or at the Dubai campus. Only 50 percent of students are studying full time. A large portion are mature-age students, often balancing work, home, and study. Finally, with only 25 percent of all students under age twenty-one, there is a much smaller cohort who have just completed secondary school. Many of the school leaver cohort are also working part time to support themselves while at the university. As a result, such individuals require flexibility but still want an on-campus experience and opportunity to work with and meet other students and their lecturers.

A single model of blended learning would not meet the needs of the differ­ent student groups, and consequendy a variety of models are in use. They may

resources provided through a Web-based learning management system students on campus to subjects where the majority of communicat collaboration occurs online with only occasional face-to-face meetings w itr. Other subjects rely on Web-based streaming audio of lectures supplemem resources accessed through the LMS but supported by weekly face-to-face i with a local tutor. Many of the overseas cohorts see a different blended: whereby they meet regularly with a local tutor to work on identified learning l designed by the Wollongong lecturer and then come together for a block teach­ing session of a few days once during the semester to meet with the lecturer.

A recent case study at University of Wollongong provides an example of hov. subjects are tailored to meet the needs of the students (Lefoe, 2003). The bache­lor of arts in community and environment was a new degree program devel­oped specifically for the satellite campus and access centers. The program was designed to be flexible in terms of time and place. This involved a blended approach that combined reduced face-to-face teaching with both synchronous and asynchronous interaction, often mediated by technology, to produce an environ­ment for learning that is student centered. Because the locations were geograph­ically distributed, the teaching and learning activities were dispersed across a number of settings, including the centers, the library, the main campus, and the student's home; across time; and through a variety of technologies, including print, videoconferencing, and online tools.

Blending On and Off Campus

The core subjects in the arts degree were not designed to use traditional lecture delivery methods for transmitting information to students. They used a student-centered approach, requiring students to take responsibility for learning the content through reading material themselves, watching a video, or engaging in activities during the tutorial and then making their own connections with the concepts discussed or presented in the tutorials or practicals. Students were required to prepare for the tutorials in some subjects by reading the lecture notes or content modules before attending the tutorial, so that they could participate in the tutorial activities and discussions.

There were seven subjects offered in 2000 through the bachelor of arts, which included five required subjects and two elective subjects. The perceptions of academic staff and students on the first year of implementation of four subjects were assessed through focus groups, semistructured interviews with staff and students, and subject surveys.

There were a variety of teaching and learning strategies in the first year. Tutorial or practical support was provided locally through tutors, while course design and coordination occurred at the Wollongong campus. A number of common themes emerged in the perceptions of the benefits of teaching and learning in a blended learning context. The supportive areas identified included:

• The opportunity for students and tutors to participate in higher education in their local community

• The commitment of the local tutors and the benefit of the small tutorial classes to student learning

• The student-centered subject designs, which included workbooks or study guides containing learning objectives, content, learning activities, and assess­ment tasks

Six common themes were identified in the perceptions expressed by those interviewed regarding the constraints of teaching and learning in a blended learn­ing context:

• Teaching and learning strategies chosen were not always the most appropriate.

• Emerging roles were different from those experienced on campus.

• Improved communication was required between the main campus and the centers.

• A need to develop new skills and understandings related to the changed learning environment.

• Workloads were perceived as high by students and staff.

• The role of technology was new and unfamiliar.

The Handbook of Blended Learning

Singaporean Blended Learning Contrasts

Singapore is a nation-state of approximately 4 million people. The major resource is seen as the people, and indeed the educational systems and aspirations seem to be overarching issues in daily life. Access to schools and universities is highly competitive, and the demand far outstrips the places available. The undergradu­ate programs are largely populated by students who have come directly from school; only in the postgraduate courses do mature-age students predominate. However, the strong tradition for many polytechnic diploma students to study off­shore to gain their degrees has created increased interest in enrolling some of these students in the undergraduate programs. These students are also slighdy older and often more prepared to study in blended learning contexts.

Overall, the tertiary system is highly evolved, with a strong emphasis on busi­ness, technical, manufacturing, and the new information economies. Unlike situations in larger countries, blended learning for most Singaporean students is a convenience to decouple time and space rather than a necessity for access. However, travel, while not costly, is time-consuming.

While blended strategies are used in on-campus courses, largely they have been supplementary rather than key to addressing core pedagogy. The challenges of campus extension have largely not been present. However, while students have attitudes with varying degrees of ambivalence toward the blending of approaches, some notable initiatives in terms of strategic benefits about the nature of blend­ing have been adopted. Blended approaches have been used to support interna­tional linkages and establish specialized niches for a high level of technical skill. Alliances have been developed with prestigious international institutions to lever­age off postgraduate specializations with particular relevance to a planned and controlled economy. Once such alliance has been with Massachusetts Institute of Technology to teach a special master's program in engineering. Here, the tech­nological connection was maintained with video recording and conferencing to expertise in North America, with local tutors providing face-to-face support. Interestingly, the program also supports and attracts students from other Southeast Asian countries to study in Singapore. Thus, this linkage is seen as a less expensive alternative to living overseas and with the benefits of accessing cutting-edge ideas. This approach to learning also supports the government's initiative to become an educational hub.

Another unique point of departure is the use of blended approaches that focus more on matching the technology's affordances and the learning task. Choosing learning tasks, which cannot be undertaken without a blended approach, is not just a convenience but a necessity. One such initiative is the development of students'

Blending On and Off Campus 331

creative skills as they can be applied to the design and programming of computer games. Rather then simply playing these games, students integrate skills sets that have practical commercial potential.

Learning from the Tale of Two Cities

While the two contexts we are describing are very different, there are some com­mon elements that can provide some guidance in selecting and designing blended learning contexts.

Student-Centered Teaching and Learning Strategies Build on Blended Contexts

Delivering and accessing a blended program requires new ways of thinking about teaching and learning. In the Wollongong case, the project team had determined that traditional teaching paradigms used at the main campus would not meet the needs of students and academic staff in the distributed context. This meant that the courses had to include appropriate learning outcomes, teaching and learn­ing strategies, content provision, assessment strategies, and learning resources, as identified in models of teaching and learning in higher education (Biggs, 1999; Laurillard, 2002; Ramsden, 1992). Such courses typically include an activity-focused study guide, which incorporates more than just content or lecture notes by providing scaffolding for student learning. They also require strategies that engage students by encouraging them to make the links between theory and prac­tice and provide feedback on students' learning performance. The Wollongong course developers devoted significant time and energy to reconceptualizing teach­ing and learning activities, so that the students could make and use their own professional role contexts as the basis for their understandings. A curriculum focus on interdisciplinarity also emphasizes the need for students to draw links and comparisons beyond narrow subject domains. Blended approaches are ideal for presenting illustrations from different areas, and online components can support access to a wide diversity of resources, which can be integrated by students as part of their assessable tasks. In the Singapore context, this approach is also used; however, the focus on international business issues and linkages with the large economies of China, India, and the United States requires the compilation and explication of multicultural resources.

At Wollongong, there is also a corollary: new course coordinators and other members of the faculty were not involved in the initial design process and did not have the same opportunity to develop the new conceptions required to move from

The Handbook of Blended Learning

a teacher-centered approach to a student-centered approach. This resulted in some course implementation that differed from the original design and caused concern for students. Students and tutors perceive the courses that support student-centered approaches to learning as more appropriate in a blended context.

Establish Clear Roles and Responsibilities

A dominant theme from the perceptions of students, tutors, and course coordina­tors is the need for clarity of the roles they play in a distributed learning context. This affects the level of responsibility they assume for aspects of teaching and learn­ing. In the WoUongong case, students indicated some uncertainty about their roles, a common problem for first-year university students (Pargetter, Mclnnis, James, Evans, & Dobson, 1998). In a student-centered learning environment, students need to understand their own role and that of their instructor, since this may differ con­siderably from their previous experience if they have participated only in teacher-centered instruction, such as at high school. If students are to take responsibility for their learning, they need to have a clear idea of what this entails. From both cases, the more mature students are often more comfortable with this expectation.

New roles are also required in the distributed learning context. Course coordinators, for instance, saw their role as administrative; however, the distrib­uted context meant that they needed to take more responsibility for communica­tion with the tutors and students and also had a more proactive student adviser role. In the WoUongong context, one coordinator felt his responsibility ended with the preparation of the resources, and in another, the coordinator taught the same subject to 180 students on campus. In both cases, they responded to questions from the tutors but had little contact with the students. As roles emerge, it is impor­tant to recognize the need for supportive understanding of the changes required and to acknowledge the changes through policy documents, to suggest new forms of communication, and to clarify roles through clear statements of expectations and responsibilities.

Ensure Communication Matches the Type of Blending

In the evaluation of the WoUongong experience, communication was identified as the third concern for students and tutors. Collaboration between the course coordinators and tutors across the distributed sites may have prevented some specific problems. Such problems included an inconsistency with implementation and marking of an assessment in one course, and the perception of the coordi­nator in another course that students were not capable of the work, yet they achieved better grades than the main campus cohort in the final results. Regular

Blending On and Off Campus

meetings during the semester would have helped to address these problems. For example, given the distance, they could have used teleconferencing, chat, or video­conferencing if people were available at the same time, or they may have used an asynchronous discussion forum or e-mail to address concerns and share strategies. The divergence between design and teaching expectations has not been as critical when the one teacher is responsible for both.

In one instance, while student-student and student-tutor interaction was high because of the small numbers, interaction between the course coordinators and the students was low and often just to solve specific problems. The research on student-faculty interaction points to the importance for student learning of this kind of interaction (Pascarella & Terenzini, 1998). The students and the tutors in one course responded positively to a videoconference the coordinator held after complaints of too little interaction during the semester. Regular face-to-face meet­ings or videoconferencing two or three times during the session can improve relationships and address concerns for many students. This indicates the possibil­ity of finding ways to communicate between the groups that harness the affor-dances of the technology when face-to-face meetings are not possible, thereby helping to remove feelings of isolation from activities and people at the main campus (Collis, 1998; Kuh & Hu, 2001).

Develop Supporting Academic Skills and Understandings

While support is provided for students though the library, student support, and information technology services, finding ways to encourage students to access this support needs further attention. Even when skill development support was pro­vided during orientation, some students require support beyond me initial orientation for the development of new academic and technical skills, especially when they are in their first year (Taylor & Blaik, 2002). Students often require skill development for technical and information literacy and for tertiary literacy skills development. They need effective just-in-time support, but to make use of this support, they need knowl­edge of the support that is available and flexible access to it (Choy, McNickle, & Clayton, 2002). Incorporating skill development such as computer and essay-writing skills within core courses could improve the overall outcomes for students.

Support and encouragement is required for tutors and academic staff to engage with their changed roles and responsibilities to develop basic student skills, and this needs to be enhanced by changes in the institutional recognition, reward, and in­centive systems (Anderson, Johnson, & Saha, 2002; University of Queensland, 2002). Interestingly in the Singapore context, this has always been a component of the staff role, since for many students, English is a second or third language, so most programs include specific writing and communication components.

The Handbook of Blended Learning

For the tutors, such changes might include recognition of the additional work­load in this role through financial rewards for extra hours resulting from the blended model and provision of office space and access to resources. Tutors also need to be included in the culture of the faculty through acknowledgment of their skills and expertise. For this to occur, it will require the establishment of effective policies on the working conditions and roles of tutors.

For the course coordinators, there will be changes in workload allocations, which take into account the changed nature of the work (Goaldrake & Stedman, 1999; Mclnnis, 2000) and policy changes, which reflect the changed role of the course coordinator in a blended learning context. Such actions will require changes to the institutional rewards and incentives systems that truly value teaching as much as research, especially in the promotions system.

Expect Higher Workloads with Blended Learning

At Wollongong, students, tutors, and course coordinators identified increased work­loads in the blended learning context. Some students perceived the workload as high and measured their workload as related to the amount of time they spent on campus or in an access center. The reduction of face-to-face time meant increased responsibility for students to work outside the class. Not surprisingly, such an expectation needed to be made clearer to students. In two courses, students specif­ically commented on the high workload. For one course, this was due to misun­derstanding of the requirements of the assessment task in one center, and, in another course, this was due to the separation between the lecture material and the practical classes. A tutor expressed concern that students saw the independent work they were required to do as additional to their load rather man as part of the student role in this environment.

Research on student workload points to the importance of balancing work­load for students. Some studies report that students will adopt a surface approach to learning when they identify workload as high (Kember & Leung, 1998; Ramsden, 1992). Niklova and Collis (1998) point out that in a student-centered learning environment, students are expected to be more independent and require " self-initiative, self-motivation, and self-control" (p. 60). They caution that increased flexibility for the learner correlates with greater workloads for the teacher as academic staff move to " consultant, collaborator, and facilitator" (p. 60).

Choose Appropriate Technologies for the Learning Tasks

Technology plays a critical role in the delivery of blended courses that use com­munication technologies to carry the key information and interactions, such as

Blending On and Off Campus

videoconferencing, audiotapes and videotapes, e-mail, and aspects of a LMS. The use of technology requires the development of new skills for students, tutors, and lecturers. The participants often report concerns about inappropriate use of tech­nology, such as videotaped lectures and online lecture notes; the need to learn com­puter literacy skills; technical difficulties with equipment, including the videoconferencing facility, computers, and printers; and the difficulties of relying on critically time- and place-dependent media like videoconferencing, which in­variably requires technical support to be available.

Students support the use of technology when they feel it enhances the learn­ing experience. For example when interactive Web-based content was provided in one course, and, in another, where videoconference was used for tutorials, students felt positive about the experience once they overcame their initial concerns about the technology-mediated environment. In the brief Singapore example, when the curriculum and pedagogy is built around the inherent technology affordances, the match and relevance are quite clear to both students and staff.

Conclusion

While quality, access, and cost are identified as major issues for higher education in the future, sustainability of new developments in an era of increased workload and the lack of downtime is becoming a major contention for academic staff. The notion of blended learning, combining the best features of traditional and distance education with appropriate use of the affordances of technology, may serve the sector well, allowing a better balance between teaching and research but still providing the quality and flexibility that students and faculty expect of a university. However, the critical factor will be juggling the pedagogical options so that the reduction in face-to-face contact hours and an increase in asynchro­nous interactions do not become opportunities to expand the working events of faculty to fill the remaining time. Time needs to be provided for knowledge gen­eration and planning activities, not just the servicing of students' immediate learn­ing needs. Getting the right mix in the blended learning context will be the challenge for the future.

References

Adams, D. (2002). The unintended consequences of deregulation: Australian higher educa­tion in the marketplace. In P. Trowler (Ed.), Higher education policy and institutional change: Intentions and outcomes in turbulent environments (pp. 108-125). Buckingham: Society for Research in Higher Education and Open University Press.

CHAPTER TWENTY-FOUR