Advertisement

The Pedagogical Development of Blended Learning

  • Marine Milad
Chapter

Abstract

The present chapter includes a review of literature and previous studies related to the pedagogical development of blended learning. It explores a variety of blended learning definitions, concepts and interpretations. The focus of these definitions is the use of technology for facilitating learning, increasing interaction and developing some skills. In addition, some benefits of establishing a blended learning environment in higher education and its drawbacks are presented. This chapter also provides a theoretical background related to the pedagogical development of blended learning starting with the behaviourist, cognitive and social constructivist rationale of pedagogy moving into connectivism that is considered as the learning theory of the current digital age. Then, it presents different learning models for pedagogical practices that contribute to the development of a blended learning research model designed for Arab Open University (AOU) students to develop some reading and writing research skills. The chapter also focuses on some practical issues and describes technology that has been used in higher education for adult learners. This leads to a discussion of the use of technology in blended learning environments during face-to-face sessions and online ones using learning management system (LMS) and forums. Some developments in learning technology and how these can be integrated into practice are discussed as well.

Keywords

Blended learning Pedagogical development Learning Teaching 

References

  1. Abdel-Wahab, A. (2008). Modelling students’ intention to adopt e-learning: A case from Egypt. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 9(1), 157–168.Google Scholar
  2. Caine, R., & Caine, G. (1994). Making connections: Teaching and the human brain. Menlo Park, CA and Alexandria, VA: Addison-Wesley and Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  3. Carmazzi, A. (2009). The colored brain communication field manual: Practical applications of directive communication psychology and the colored brain to work, leaders, business, relationships. Veritas Publishing, CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.Google Scholar
  4. Cole, P. R. (1995). Constructivism: Rediscovering the discovered. Curator, 38(4), 225–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Confrey, J. (1995). How compatible are radical constructivism, socio-cultural approaches, and social constructivism? In M. Schcolniket, et al. (Eds.), Constructivism in theory and in practice, English teaching form (Vol. 44 (4), pp. 12–21).Google Scholar
  6. Conole, G., & Oliver, M. (2007). Introduction. In G. Conole & M. Oliver (Eds.), Contemporary perspectives in e-learning research: Themes, methods and impact on practice (pp. 3–15). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Cullen, J., Hadjivassilio, K., Hamilton, E., Kelleher, J., Sommerld, E., & Stern, E. (2002). Review of current pedagogic research and practice in the fields of post-compulsory education and lifelong learning. London: The Tavistock Institute.Google Scholar
  8. Davis, F. D. (1985). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results, doctoral dissertation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Sloan School of Management.Google Scholar
  9. Dodge, B. (1995). Some thoughts about WebQuests. Available from: http://edweb.sdsu.edu/courses/edtec596/about_webquests.html. December 2016.
  10. Donohue, J., Adinolfi, L., & Shrestha, P. (2009). Professional communication skills for business studies. Milton Keynes: The Open University.Google Scholar
  11. Downes, S. (2006). Learning networks and connective knowledge. Instructional Technology Forum: Paper 92. Retrieved from http://www.it.coe.uga.edu/itforum/paper92/paper92.html.
  12. Dudeney, G. (2007). The internet and the language classroom: A practical guide for teachers (Cambridge Handbooks for Language Teachers), 2nd ed. UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Duffy, T. M., & Cunningham, D. J. (1996). Constructivism: Implications for the design and delivery of instruction. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology (pp. 170–198). New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  14. Eisenberg, M., & Berkowitz, P. (2007). Big6 stages of seeking or applying information to solve a problem. Retrieved from http://www.big6.com/what-is-the-big6/.
  15. Fosnot, C. T., & Perry, R. (2005). Constructivism: A psychological theory of learning. In C. T. Fosnot (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice (pp. 8–33). New York: Teacher’s College Press.Google Scholar
  16. Garrison, R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. Internet and Higher Education, 7, 95–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Garrison, R., & Vaughan, H. (2008). Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles and guidelines. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  18. Govindasamy, T. (2002). Successful implementation of e-learning: Pedagogical considerations. Internet and Higher Education, 4, 287–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Graham, C. R. (2005). Blended learning systems: Definition, current trends, and future directions, In C. J. Bonk. & C. R. Graham (Eds.), Handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs (pp. 3–21). San Francisco: Wiley.Google Scholar
  20. Hara, N., & Kling, R. (1999). Students’ frustrations with a Web-based distance education course. First Monday, 4(12).  https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v4i12.710. Retrieved from http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue4_12/hara/index.html.
  21. Hassan, A. A. (2005). Distance higher education in the Arab region: The need for quality assurance frameworks. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 8(1), 1–11.Google Scholar
  22. Heinze, A. (2008). Blended learning: An interpretive action research study. Salford: University of Salford.Google Scholar
  23. Ibrahim, H. (2006). The effect of using the reading for writing approach on developing the writing ability of Egyptian EFL learners and their attitudes towards writing. Online Submission, ERIC Number: ED498363.Google Scholar
  24. Ireland, T. (2007). Situating connectivism [Design Wiki]. ETEC 510: Design of technology-supported learning environments. University of British Columbia. Retrieved from http://etec.ctlt.ubc.ca/510wiki/Situating_Connectivism.
  25. Kember, D. (1997). A reconceptualisation of the research into university academics’ conceptions of teaching. Learning and Instruction, 7(3), 255–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kerr, B. (2006). A challenge to connectivism. Retrieved from http://www.billkerr2.blogspot.com/2006/12/challenge-to-connectivism.html.
  27. Kotb, A. (2003). Using Web Quests effectively in ESP. Paper presented at the conference on ESP in the Third Millennium: Challenges and Aspirations. Conference Proceedings in Bibliotheca Alexandria.Google Scholar
  28. Landauer, T. K., & Dumais, S. T. (1997). A Solution to Plato’s problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction and representation of knowledge. Retrieved from http://lsa.colorado.edu/papers/plato/plato.annote.html.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Laurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking university teaching: A framework for the effective use of educational technology. London: Routledge/Falmer.Google Scholar
  30. Littlejohn, A., & Pegler, C. (2007). Preparing for blended e-learning. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Masie, E. (2005). The blended learning imperative. In C. J. Bonk & C. R. Graham (Eds.), The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs (pp. 22–26). San Francisco: Pfeiffer.Google Scholar
  32. Mason, R., & Rennie, F. (2006). E-learning: The key concepts. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Merryfield, M. (2001). The paradoxes of teaching a multicultural education course online. Journal of Teacher Education, 52(4), 283–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mongillo, G., & Wilder, H. (2012). An examination of at-risk college freshmen’s expository literacy skills using interactive online writing activities. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 42(2), 27–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. OED. (2004). Oxford English Dictionary Online. Available at: http://www.oed.com (November 16, 2015).
  36. Oliver, M., & Trigwell, K. (2005). Can blended learning be redeemed? E-learning Journal, 2(1), 17–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Orey, M. (2003). Definition of blended learning. University of Georgia. Retrieved from http://www.arches.uga.edu/~mikeorey/blendedLearning.
  38. Roybal, R. (2012). Creating critical thinking writers in middle school: A look at the Jane Schaffer Model. Online Submission, ERIC Number: ED530897.Google Scholar
  39. Sahakian, S., Amin, M., & Hanafy, M. (2003). Online content-based instruction in ESP: From practice to theory. ESP in the Third Millennium: Challenges and Aspirations, Conference Proceedings in Bibliotheca Alexandria.Google Scholar
  40. Salmon, G. (2005). Flying not flapping: A strategic framework for e-learning and pedagogical innovation in higher education institutions. Alt-J, 13(3), 201–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schcolnik, M., Kol., S., & Abarbanel, J. (2006). Constructivism in theory and in Practice. English Teaching Form, 44(4), 12–20.Google Scholar
  42. Sharp, V. (2002). Computer education for teachers: Integrating technology into classroom teaching. Boston: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  43. Sharpe, R., Benfield, G., Roberts, G., & Francis, R. (2006). The undergraduate experience of blended e-learning: A review of UK literature and practice. Higher Education Academy [Online]. Available at: https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/system/files/sharpe_benfield_roberts_francis_0.pdf (August 14, 2018).
  44. Shepard, L. A. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher, 29(7), 4–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sherry, L. (1996). Issues in distance learning. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 1(4), 337–365.Google Scholar
  46. Siemens, G. (2004). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. Elearnspace Blog. http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm.
  47. Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: Learning as network creation. E-Learning Space.Org Website. Retrieved from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/networks.htm.
  48. Siemens, G. (2006). Connectivism: Learning theory or pastime of the self-amused? Elearnspace blog. Retrieved from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism_self-amused.htm.
  49. Skinner, B. F. (1954). The science of learning and the art of teaching. Harvard Education Review, 24(1), 86–97.Google Scholar
  50. Stacey, E., & Gerbic, P. (2007). Teaching for blended learning: Research perspectives from on-campus and distance students. Educational and Information Technologies, 12(3), 165–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Stacey, E., Smith, P. J., & Barty, K. (2004). Adult learners in the workplace: Online learning and communities of practice. Distance Education, 25(1), 107–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Tesone, D. V., Alexakis, G., & Platt, A. (2003). Distance learning programs for non-traditional and traditional students in the business disciplines. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 6(4). Available at: http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/winter64/tesone64.html.
  53. Vaughan, N. (2007). Perspectives on blended learning in higher education. International Journal on E-Learning, 6(1), 81–94.Google Scholar
  54. Verhagen, P. (2006). Connectivism: A new learning theory? [Online]. Available at: http://elearning.surf.nl/e-learning/english/3793 (August, 2016).
  55. Von-Glaserfeld, E. (1996). Introduction: Aspects of constructivism. In C. T. Fosnot (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice (pp. 3–7). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  56. Watson, J. B. (1997). Behaviorism. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
  57. Wenger, E. (1999). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. M. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice. Boston: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  59. Wolsey, T. D., & Fisher, D. (2008). Learning to predict and predicting to learn: Cognitive strategies and instructional routines. San Diego State University: Allyn & Bacon and Pearson.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marine Milad
    • 1
  1. 1.Arab Open UniversityKuwait CityKuwait

Personalised recommendations