It's nice to feel validated...

OK, so yesterday I joined the ACTL Blended Learning Initiative (BLI) in participating in a multimedia training presentation on "Organizing Blended Courses for Optimal Student Engagement," presented by Ivan  (Ike) Shibley of Penn State - Berks and sponsored by Magna Online Seminars. It was a recording of an online webinar, and the presentation style was PowerPoint, with a video talking-head window in the corner -- precisely the format I'm using for my podcasts (theirs is a more polished version, natch), so already I have a sense that developing this kind of online learning experience may not be as hard as I thought.

Moreover, the suggestions Shibley presented led me to conclude that there are many folks (myself included) who already use "blended learning" in the way experts conceptualize it. Thus, it seems that presenting this concept to campus will be that much easier, as there's a basis for identification with elements of the status quote.
As Inigo Montoya began, "Let me 'splain. No, there is too much. Let me sum up."


First of all, Shibley defines "blended" (or hybrid) learning as "a mixture of face-to-face activities with online activities."  A handout for the webinar quotes Garrison and Vaughn's Blended Learning in Higher Education (2008): "Blended learning is the thoughtful fusion of face-to-face and online learning experiences."  In the model Shibley presents, there are two primary online experiences (one for the pre-class period, one for the post-class period) that many at Augie are already familiar with, at least in concept:  the class guide, and the online quiz. 

Now, if you use Moodle as I do, as an online syllabus and repository for supplemental class materials, like readings and lecture notes, then voila!  Guess what?  You're doing blended learning.  Shibley's notion of the "class guide" is a tad more pedagogy-centered, as he suggests posting specific learning objectives/goals with the day-to-day (or weekly, or topically organized) guide of student work... i.e., "here's what you need to focus on, here's what you should be able to know/do/etc.", using active language, as well as providing specific suggestions on what to focus on in course readings, links to other content like webpages or podcasts, etc.  But this isn't far off from what many of us already do, and Moodle has the capability to do all of this, so in a sense we're off to a less-difficult-than-expected start.  For instance, what I'm doing now with posting in-class discussion questions in advance is rather close to what I often do now... I can polish that up, as well as emphasizing learning goals more intentionally.

[Question: I'm going to use pre-class quizzes to make sure students have done the reading and podcast before class.  Moodle can time-stamp online stuff so I know who has done it, and when... so can I use this online record as a basis for refusing student entry to class unless they've done the podcast and quiz (and are therefore prepared for the class activity)?  Or would that be too draconian?]

At the same time, at this point, I was a bit non-plussed -- this is all it takes to achieve student engagement in an online environment?  Perhaps it adds to active time spent on task, with the material, so on that level I guess it's value added.  I wished that he had said more about the pedagogical design and value of online materials like podcast lectures.  However, when Shibley discussed Bloom's taxonomy, I started feeling better. 

(source for the above graphic is here)

Shibley argued that the pre-class online work should be where the lower-order levels of learning activity -- remembering, understanding -- take place, and then the mid-order stuff -- applying, analyzing -- should take place in the face-to-face classroom, and the higher-order stuff -- evaluating, creating -- take place in the post-class time.  This is exactly what I have in mind with my podcast-followed-by-in-class activity-followed-by-eventual critical essays and term project plan... so it's nice to feel validated.  My plan, of course, is to migrate my lectures on rhetorical concepts/theories/methods to online video podcasts, and then to quiz students on the readings and podcasts online in advance of class, so we can spend the class period addressing questions and then applying the concepts and context in critical analysis of texts through small group collaboration and class discussion of the results.

Shibley also discussed blended pedagogy through the use of clickers to engage students in active response to in-class problem-solving and discussions.  The examples he gave were chemistry-problem heavy (as a chemist, natch), and my pedagogy doesn't lend itself to individual multiple-choice response, so that part didn't get me stimulated, but I can absolutely see the value for a variety of courses, especially 100/200-level content classes, especially in large sections, especially in the sciences, or in discussion situations where taking in-class surveys and polls as a means for generating points of discussion.

As for post-class blended pedagogy, Shibley advocated the periodic quiz/exam online, enabling students to take what they learned in class and use it with new problems or in a new context.  He addressed predictable concerns of cheating in two primary ways: (a) constructing a quiz bank that generates unique quizzes for each user, each time (which you can do in Moodle), and (b) that taking such quizzes multiple times for a better score is no big deal.  Quizzes like this can be given a nominal point value, so they shouldn't contribute appreciably to grade inflation; at the same time, he pointed out the flip-side of the concern: students actually want to spent extra time on the material outside of class -- working it for the higher grade, to be sure, but it's still active engagement that can result in deeper learning. 

As for me, this sort of post-class quiz is less useful, given the sort of work I want my students doing (constructing critical interpretive arguments after analyzing rhetorical texts... not exactly a multiple-choice gig), but post-class reinforcement and extension activies make good sense -- maybe a brief opportunity for students to reflect on "here's the key thing I got out of class today, here's the areas that I'm still unsure or confused about" as a means of formative assessment?

One point raised in the webinar is a poser: impacts on in-class time?  Early in the session, when defining "blended learning," Shibley points out that "usually face-to-face time is reduced by 50% but reductions range from 10% - 90%."  In other words, when some learning activity is migrated to the online environment, this means that time spent in-class can actually be reduced.  Of course, here's the thing: as a questioner pointed out during the live webinar, how do you know that the time reduced from class meetings is actually being used online by students?  His answer wasn't great -- he cited NSSE data we're familiar with, that students average 10-15 hours of preparation time each week for a 15 credit hour (semester) load, even though conventional wisdom holds that they should spent at least twice that.  At the same time, Shibley argued that, as long as students are spending the same total time as they would in a conventional class, and are more engaged as they go, then that's a benefit. 

I suppose.  That said, if the key to effective learning in online and blended environments, according to the Department of Education study, is time spent on task, then why reduce class time?  Why not use the in-class time to do more higher-order stuff?  That's my current plan... but, of course, this spring ijn the pilot section I'll play it by ear, since this will be a first shot at a new model.  If it turns out that the in-class activity and discussion seems to find a natural ending point and we still have 15-20 minutes left (the time they've spent with my podcast and quiz before class), I'll certainly sleep well that night with no regrets.

Long story short (too late), this webinar was a pretty useful experience -- some helpful information, some questions to pursue, and a broader sense that I'm on the right track in this project.  So that's pretty cool.