Flexible Learning Environments: Leveraging the Affordances of Flexible Delivery and Flexible Learning

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to explore the key features of flexible learning environments (FLEs). Key principles associated with FLEs are explained. Underlying tenets and support mechanisms necessary for the implementation of FLEs are described. Similarities and differences in traditional learning and FLEs are explored. Finally, strategies and techniques for becoming a successful learner and facilitator in FLEs are presented.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. American Distance Education Consortium (2002). ADEC guiding principles for distance teaching and learning. Available online: http://www.adec.edu/admin/papers/distance-teaching_principles.html.

  2. Anton, M. (1999). The discourse of a learner-centered classroom: Sociocultural perspectives on teacher–learner interaction in the second-language classroom. The Modern Language Journal, 83, 303–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Christensen, E. W., Anakwe, U. P., & Kessler, E. H. (2001). Receptivity to distance learning: The effect of technology, reputation, constraints, and learning preferences. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33, 263–279.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Collis, B., & Moonen, J. (2001). Flexible learning in a digital world: Experiences and expectations. London, England: Kogan Page.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Duffy, T. M., Lowyck, J., & Jonassen, D. H. (1993). Designing environments for constructive learning. Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany; New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Evans, T. (1999). From dual-mode to flexible delivery: Paradoxical transitions in Australian (open and distance education). Performance Improvement Quarterly, 12, 84–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Grant, M. M., & Hill, J. R. (2006). Weighing the risks with the rewards: Implementing student-centered pedagogy within high-stakes testing. In R. Lambert & C. McCarthy (Eds.), Understanding teacher stress in an age of accountability (pp. 19–42). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Hannafin, M. J., Hall, C., Land, S., & Hill, J. (1994). Learning in open-ended environments: Assumptions, methods, and implications. Educational Technology, 34, 48–55.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Hannafin, M. J., Hill, J. R., & Land, S. M. (1997). Student-centered learning and interactive multimedia: Status, issues and implication. Contemporary Education, 68, 94–99.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Hill, J. R. (2002). Strategies and techniques for community building in Web-based learning environments. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 14, 67–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hill, J. R., & Hannafin, M. J. (2001). Teaching and learning in digital environments: The resurgence of resource-based learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(3), 37–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hollenbeck, J. (1998). Democracy and computer conferencing. Theory into Practice, 37(1), 38–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Maeroff, G. I. (2003). A classroom of one: How online learning is changing our schools and colleges. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Moore, M. G., & Anderson, W. G. (2004). Handbook of distance education. Mahwah, New Jersey: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Nikolova, I., & Collis, B. (1998). Flexible learning and design of instruction. British Journal of Educational Technology, 29, 59–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Nunan, T., George, R., & McCausland, H. (2000). Rethinking the ways in which teaching and learning are supported: The Flexible Learning Centre at the University of South Australia. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 22, 85–98.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Oliver, R., & Herrington, J. (2002). Teaching and learning online: A beginner's guide to e-learning and e-teaching in higher education. Mt. Lawley, Western Australia, Australia: Centre for Research in Information Technology and Communications, Edith Cowan University.

  18. Osciak, S. Y., & Milheim, W. D. (2001). Multiple intelligences and the design of Web-based instruction. International Journal of Instructional Media, 28, 355–61.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Owston, R. (2000). Evaluating Web-based learning environments: Strategies and insights. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 3, 79–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (1999). Building learning communities in cyberspace : Effective strategies for the online classroom. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Pataray-Ching, J., & Kavanaugh-Anderson, D. (1999, Fall). Supporting learner-generated inquiries. The Educational Forum, 64(1), 58–66.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations.New York, NY: Free.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Simons, P. R.-J. (1993). Constructive learning: The role of the learner. In T. M. Duffy, J. Lowyck & D. H. Jonassen (Eds.), Designing environments for constructive learning (pp. 291–313). Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany; New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2000). Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Smith, P. J. (2000). Flexible delivery and apprentice training: Preferences, problems and challenges. Journal of Vocational Education & Training: The Vocational Aspect of Education, 52, 483–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Smith, P. J. (2001). Technology, student learning preferences, and the design of flexible learning programs. Instructional Science, 29, 237–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Stoll, C. (2000). High-tech heretic: Reflections of a computer contrarian. Norwell, MA: Anchor.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Taylor, J. C. (1998). Flexible delivery: The globalisation of lifelong learning. Indian Journal of Open Learning, 7, 55–65.

    Google Scholar 

  29. University of Wisconsin Extension Services (2002). Distance education clearinghouse. Available online: http://www.uwex.edu/disted/home.html.

  30. White, K. W., & Weight, B. H. (2000). The online teaching guide: A handbook of attitudes, strategies and techniques for the virtual classroom. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Wyatt, G. (2005). Satisfaction, academic rigor and interaction: Perceptions of online instruction. Education, 125, 460–468.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Janette R. Hill.

Additional information

Janette Hill

is an Associate Professor in the Department of Educational Psychology and Instructional Technology at The University of Georgia, Athens. She received her Ph.D. from The Florida State University in Instructional Systems. Dr. Hill's research focuses on online learning with adults, specifically exploring issues related to building community and connections with others in virtual environments. Dr. Hill can be reached at janette@uga.edu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hill, J.R. Flexible Learning Environments: Leveraging the Affordances of Flexible Delivery and Flexible Learning. Innov High Educ 31, 187–197 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-006-9016-6

Download citation

Key words

  • flexible learning
  • online learning