Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Effectiveness of Technology Enhancement in Blended Learning: An Instrumental Perspective

  • Conference paper
Technology in Education. Transforming Educational Practices with Technology

Part of the book series: Communications in Computer and Information Science ((CCIS,volume 494))

Abstract

Studies on institutional policies on the use of technology in blended learning reveal that technology choices and policy implementation are largely governed by three common perceptions: (1) technology per se has its own logic of effectiveness and operation, (2) the choice of technology is based on its utilities across contexts, and (3) the application of technology is pre-determined. However, this commonality overlooks the existence of various factors that shape the effectiveness of technology at different stages of application.

This paper examines, via the perspective of policy instrument, various factors that may hinder or facilitate the effectiveness of technology in blended learning. The use of technology is conceptualized as a policy instrument in the process of formulating and implementing institutional policies on blended learning. Its effectiveness is analyzed using four theories of policy instrument, namely the ‘classical’, ‘contextual’, ‘instrument-context’ and ‘constitutive’ approaches to instrument. Results of the analysis show the dynamic nature of effectiveness which should be considered when formulating institutional policies on technology-enhanced learning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Mars, M.M., Ginter, M.B.: Connecting organizational environments with the instructional technology practices of community college faculty. Community College Review 34(4), 324–343 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Omollo, K.L., Rahman, A., Yebuah, C.A.: Producing OER from scratch: The case of health sciences at the University of Ghana and the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology. In: Glennie, J., Harley, K., Butcher, N., van Wyk, T. (eds.) Open Educational Resources and Change in Higher Education: Reflections from Practice. Commonwealth of Learning, Vancouver (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Garrison, D.R.: Elearning in the 21st Century, 2nd edn. Routledge Falmer, New York (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  4. McLoughlin, C., Loch, B.: Scaffolding conceptual learning in mathematics with technology enhanced pedagogy—a preliminary evaluation of student engagement with screencasts. In: Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2013, pp. 259–265 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Glance, D.G., Forsey, M., Riley, M.: The pedagogical foundations of massive open online courses. First Monday 18(5) (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ali, A., Elfessi, A.: Examining students performance and attitudes towards the use of information technology in a virtual and conventional setting. Journal of Interactive Online Learning 2(3), 1–9 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Merino, D.N., Abel, K.D.: Evaluating the effectiveness of computer tutorials versus traditional lecturing in accounting topics. Journal of Engineering Education 92(2), 189–194 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Minocha, S.: Role of social software tools in education: A literature review.  Education and Training 51(5/6), 353–369 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Vamosi, A.R., Pierce, B.G., Slotkin, M.H.: Distance learning in an accounting principles course – student satisfaction and perceptions of efficacy. Journal of Education for Business 79(6), 360–366 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Connell, R.S.: Academic libraries, Facebook and MySpace, and student outreach: A survey of student opinion. Libraries and the Academy 9(1), 25–36 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hewitt, A., Forte, A.: Crossing boundaries: Identity management and student/faculty relationships on the Facebook. Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of Computer Supported Cooperative Work. Banff, Alberta, Canada (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Li, L., Pitts, J.P.: Does it really matter? Using virtual office hours to enhance student-faculty interaction. Journal of Information Systems Education 20(1), 175–185 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Mazer, J.P., Murphy, R.E., Simonds, C.J.: The effects of teacher self-disclosure via Facebook on teacher credibility. Learning, Media and Technology 34(2), 175–183 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Flyvbjerg, B.: Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry 12(2), 209–245 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Peters, B.G., van Nispen, F.K.M. (eds.): Public Policy Instruments: Evaluating the Tools of Public Administration. Edward Elgar Publishing, Northampton (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Salamon, L.M. (ed.): The Tools of Government: A Guide to the New Governance. Oxford University Press, New York (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Leung, C., Rea-Dickins, P.: Teacher assessment as policy instrument: Contradictions and capacities. Language Assessment Quarterly 4(1), 6–36 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. UVU Policy Office. Glossary of terms for campuswide policies. Retrieved from the Utah Valley University (UVU) website (2014), http://www.uvu.edu/policies/procedures/terms.html (accessed April 25, 2014)

  19. Margetts, H., Willcocks, L.: Information technology as policy instrument in the UK social security system: Delivering an operational strategy. International Review of Administrative Sciences 58(3), 329–347 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Cohen, M.A.: Information as a policy instrument in protecting the environment: what have we learned? The Environmental Law Reporter 31(1), 10425–10431 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Ferran, N., Minguillon, J., Pascual, M., Barragan, C., Canals, A., Geser, G., Gruber, A., Hornung-Prähauser, V., Schaffert, S., Baumgartner, P., Naust-Schulz, V., Pullich, L., Lamminnen, S., Koivisto, A., Väliharju, T.: The concept of open educational resources as instrument for implementing lifelong learning strategies at higher and further education institutions. In: Proceedings of EDEN Conference, Vienna, pp. 591–597 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Colis, B., Moonen, J.: Flexible learning in a digital world: Experiences and expectations. Kogan-Page, London (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Harding, A., Kaczynski, D., Wood, L.N.: Evaluation of blended learning: analysis of quantitative data. In: UniServe Science Blended Learning Symposium Proceedings, pp. 56–72 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Lascoumes, P., LeGales, P.: Introduction: Understanding public policy through its instruments – from the nature of instruments to the sociology of public policy instrumentation. Governance 20(1), 1–21 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Linder, S.H., Peters, B.G.: The study of policy instruments: Four schools of thought. In: Peters, B.G., Van Nispen, F.K.M. (eds.) Public Policy Instruments: Evaluating the Tools of Public Administration. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Howlett, M.: Governance modes, policy regimes and operational plans: A multi-level nested model of policy instrument choice and policy design. Policy Sciences 42(1), 73–89 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  27. Riggs, J.: MOOCs, flips, and blends. Huffington Post (2013), http://www.huffingtonpost.com/janet-riggs/flips-and-blends_b_2593733.html (retrieved)

  28. Whitelock, D., Jelfs, A.: Editorial: Journal of educational media special issue on blended learning. Journal of Educational Media 28(2-3), 99–100 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Mitchell, A., Honore, S.: Criteria for successful blended learning. Industrial and Commercial Training 39(3), 143–149 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Delialioglu, O., Yildirim, Z.: Design and development of a technology enhanced hybrid instruction based on MOLTA model: Its effectiveness in comparison to traditional instruction. Computers & Education 51(1), 474–483 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Garrison, D.R., Kanuka, H.: Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education 7(2), 95–105 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Dowling, C., Godfrey, J.M., Gyles, N.: Do hybrid flexible delivery teaching methods improve accounting students’ learning outcomes? Accounting Education: An International Journal 12(4), 373–391 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Broek, S., Hake, B.J.: Increasing participation of adults in higher education: Factors for successful policies. International Journal of Lifelong Education 31(4), 397–417 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Dean, P., Stahl, M., Sylwester, D., Peat, J.: Effectiveness of combined delivery modalities for distance learning and resident learning. Quarterly Review of Distance Education 2(3), 247–254 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Wallace, L., Young, J.: Implementing blended learning: Policy implications for universities. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration 13(8) (2010), http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/winter134/_young134.html

  36. Snodin, N.S.: The effects of blended learning with a CMS on the development of autonomous learning: A case study of different degrees of autonomy achieved by individual learners. Computers & Education 61, 209–216 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Kemmer, D.: Blended learning and the development of student responsibility for learning: A case study of a ‘widening access’ university. Widening Participation & Lifelong Learning 13(3), 60–74 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Napier, N.P., Dekhane, S., Smith, S.: Transitioning to blended learning: Understanding student and faculty perceptions. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 15(1), 20–33 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Carter, L., Salyers, V.: E-learning as educational innovation in universities. In: Shavinina, L.V. (ed.) The Routledge International Handbook of Innovation Education, pp. 442–455. Routledge (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Ratz, S.: Community language classes: How ready are students for more technology? Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice 1(1), 3–10 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Kim, K.-J., Bonk, C.J., Oh, E.: The present and future state of blended learning in workplace learning settings in the United States. Performance Improvement 47(8), 5–17 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Precel, K., Eshet-Alkalai, Y., Alberton, Y.: Pedagogical and design aspects of a blended learning course. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning 10(2), 1–16 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Werth, E., Werth, L., Kellerer, E.: Transforming K-21 Rural Education through Blended Learning: Barriers and Promising Practices (2013), http://www.inacol.org/cms/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/iNACOL-Transforming-K-12-Rural-Education-through-Blended-Learning.pdf (accessed April 29, 2014) (retrieved)

  44. McIntyre, S., Watson, K., Larsen, S.: Strategies for large scale blended learning initiatives: Training, teaching and management Paper presented at the 4th International Blended Learning Conference, University of Hetfordshire, Hatfield, UK (2009), http://www.unsworks.unsw.edu.au/primo_library/libweb/action/dlDisplay.do?docId=unsworks_7750&vid=UNSWORKS (accessed April 29, 2014) (retrieved)

  45. Tynan, B., Ryan, Y., Hinton, L., Mills, A.L.: Out of Hours, Final report of the project ‘e-teaching leadership: planning and implementing a benefits-oriented costs model for technology enhanced learning. Australian Learning & Teaching Council (2012), http://www.olt.gov.au/system//resources/_1242__Report_2012_0.. (accessed April 29, 2014) (retrieved)

  46. Russell, C.: Naming and measuring the elephants: Sustainable change for blended learning. In: Proceedings Ascilite Wellington 2012, pp. 809–813 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  47. Rolfe, V.E., Alcocer, M., Bentley, E., Milne, D., Meyer-Sahling, J.: Academic staff attitudes towards electronic learning in Arts and Sciences. European Journal of Distance Learning (EURODL) (2008), http://www.eurodl.org/?p=archives&year=2008&halfyear=1&article=313 (accessed April 29, 2014) (retrieved)

  48. European Association of Distance Teaching Universities, OpenupEd. (2014), http://www.openuped.eu/ (assessed May 30, 2014) (retrieved)

  49. Chen, C.C., Jones, K.T.: Blended learning vs. traditional classroom settings: Assessing effectiveness and student perceptions in an MBA accounting course. Journal of Educators Online 4(1), 1–15 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  50. Akkoyunlu, B., Soylu, M.Y.: A study of student’s perceptions in a blended learning environment based on different learning styles. Educational Technology & Society 11(1), 183–193 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  51. Kolb, D.A.: Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (1984)

    Google Scholar 

  52. Tempelaar, D.T., Rienties, B., Giesbers, B.: Who profits most from blended learning? Industry and Higher Education 23(4), 285–293 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Banerjee, G.: Blended environments: Learning effectiveness and student satisfaction at a small college in transition. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 15(1), 8–20 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  54. Benson, V., Anderson, D., Ooms, A.: Educators’ perceptions, attitudes and practices: Blended learning in business and management education. Research in Learning Technology 19(2), 143–154 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Zhu, C., Valcke, M., Schellens, T.: A cross-cultural study of teacher perspectives on teacher roles and adoption of online collaborative learning in higher education. European Journal of Teacher Education 33(2), 147–165 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Salmon, G., Jones, S., Armellini, A.: Building institutional capability in e-learning design. ALT-J Research in Learning Technology 16(2), 15–95 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Open University of Hong Kong, 30 Good Shepherd Street, Homantin, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, China

    Kam Cheong Li, Helen Lam & Terry Lee

Authors
  1. Kam Cheong Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Helen Lam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Terry Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Unversity Research Centre, Open University of Hong Kong, Ho Man Tin, Kowloon, Hong Kong

    Kam Cheong Li

  2. Department of Mathematics and Information Technology, The Hong Kong Institute of Education, Hong Kong

    Tak-Lam Wong

  3. The Open University of Hong Kong, Good Shepherd Street, Homantin, Kowloon, Hong Kong

    Simon K. S. Cheung

  4. School of Professional and Continuing Education, The Univeristy of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

    Jeanne Lam

  5. Caritas Institute of Higher Education, 18 Chui Ling Road, Hong Kong

    Kwan Keung Ng

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Li, K.C., Lam, H., Lee, T. (2015). Effectiveness of Technology Enhancement in Blended Learning: An Instrumental Perspective. In: Li, K.C., Wong, TL., Cheung, S.K.S., Lam, J., Ng, K.K. (eds) Technology in Education. Transforming Educational Practices with Technology. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 494. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-46158-7_19

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-46158-7_19

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-46157-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-46158-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation