Academic
Exchange Quarterly
Winter 2004
ISSN 1096-1453 Volume
8, Issue 4
To cite, use print source rather than this
on-line version which may not reflect print copy format
requirements or text lay-out and pagination.
The Best
of Both Worlds: Teaching a Hybrid Course
Elizabeth Blakesley Lindsay,
Beth
Lindsay,
Abstract While
online education alone has strengths and weaknesses, the benefits of online
learning can be used to enhance face-to-face teaching. This article will discuss an example of capitalizing
on the strengths of online courses to improve interaction and student
performance within a traditional class setting.
Introduction
While
distance education programs have exploded in recent years, a new trend within
the field has emerged: hybrid or blended courses. A hybrid course is a traditional, face-to-face
course that has incorporated online elements, using the same course management
software that underpins courses taught entirely online. This model can appeal to a wide range of
instructors, even those who are critical of online learning, and can be used to
improve a variety of courses or solve particular problems. Some universities have used the hybrid model
to solve classroom space shortages, to improve communication between students
and instructors in large classes, and to address students’ needs for computer
and technology literacy.[1] This article
will explore an example of using a hybrid course to increase communication and
improve a problematic course assignment.
Online Teaching
and Learning
Distance
learning has shown substantial growth in the past decade. The National Center for Education Statistics
(NCES) found that during 1994-1995, 33% of colleges and universities were
offering distance courses, with another 25% planning to begin within 3 years.[2]
During another study in 2000-2001, NCES
learned that 56% were offering distance courses and 12% were planning to begin.[3]
Additionally, according to these two reports, the number of institutions
responding that there were no plans to offer distance learning opportunities
decreased from 42% to 31%. Further
comparison of the two reports also shows extensive growth in number of students
and number of courses offered. According
to the data, 753,640 students were enrolled in distance courses in 1994-95,
while enrollment jumped to 3,077,000 for the 2000-01 academic year.
As Christopher
R. Wolfe reminds us, teaching online is teaching,
and quick, easy access to information is not a replacement for education.[4] Teaching online requires instructors to have different
skills than needed in teaching face-to-face. Planning and developing
asynchronous courses must be done completely before the course begins. Transforming assignments, texts, and other
course materials into an online environment can be difficult, and learning to
communicate effectively in a different medium can also be challenging for
instructors.[5] Moving gradually into
online course delivery by using a hybrid system is an attractive model for many
instructors.[6]
Participating in
an online learning environment also requires students to have or develop skills
beyond those needed for being a successful student in traditional
classrooms. Without the live interaction
in a classroom, distance learners must be able to process written materials and
texts at least as efficiently as they process lecture and discussion. Further, they must be able to make
“connections between new and existing knowledge” on their own.[7] Studies of the psychology of learning online
and issues related to communication in the online environment abound.[8] Most of these explore the issues that arise
due to the concrete difference in the space where learning happens. The difference between physical and virtual
spaces leads to profound changes in social interaction, from the simple process
of holding a conversation to larger issues of depersonalization and identity.[9]
In a hybrid
course, some of these issues will be moot, since there will be live, in person
class sessions available for covering material and clearing up problems. In most hybrid courses, though, what often moves
online is a portion of the communication process. As Priscilla Y. Romkema
notes, using the online course area for asking questions allowed for the
face-to-face sessions to be devoted to instructor lecture and other class
activities; time was not taken away from those elements and the question and
answer bank became a permanent feature that could be consulted by any student
at any time.[10] Although face-to-face contact will continue in a hybrid course,
it important to design and monitor the online communications to ensure that
they are effective and productive.
Key studies of
teaching information literacy online have focused largely on the needs of the
students and a perceived tension between information literacy and online
learning.[11] Leslie J. Reynolds
discusses the importance of addressing learning styles and designing courses to
foster interaction, noting that “regardless of the learning environment,”
students must be “vested in ‘coming’ to class,” regardless of where the class
takes place.[12] Kate Manuel also
describes the impact of online learning on students. Manuel’s students were taking the online
information literacy course in addition to on-campus courses and were all new
to distance learning, which led to numerous difficulties for the students.[13] Elevating the threaded discussions to the
level of a lively, in-class discussion also proved difficult, which affected
those students who learn best in a collaborative environment and need direct
interaction.[14] All of these issues should
affect the design process of any online course. To be most effective, these
issues should also be considered in transforming face-to-face courses into
hybrid ones, although the dynamics and demographics of these courses can be
different.
Course
Transformation
Gen
Ed 300, Accessing Information for Research, is a one-credit, eight-week
elective course taught by library faculty members at
A
colleague had taught this section once before I began my current position, and
I used his syllabus the first time I taught the course. One of the requirements was a research
journal. The purpose of this ongoing
assignment was to encourage reflective thinking about the research process and
to help the students organize their thoughts and identify areas that needed
more attention. The journals were
collected halfway through the course and at the end of the course.
The
research journals were disappointing on many levels. This type of assignment is a prime candidate
for procrastination, and it was obvious that many students had written all the
entries in one sitting. Although clear
instructions had been given and several discussions were held in class about
what reflective writing was and what kinds of topics they needed to think about
for their journals, a significant number of the research journals were merely
narrative accounts of what transpired during each class session, rather than
what they thought about it, how it would affect their own research practice, or
how they planned to use the information for their future role as peer facilitators. Written feedback and continued discussion
reduced the number of the “Dear Diary” or “blow-by-blow” styles of research
journals that were submitted at the end of class, but there were some students
who could not break out of that mold.
Although
I believed that this assignment was useful and had a place in the curriculum,
two major problems led me to reconsider it.
Collecting journals twice did not provide enough opportunity for me to
give feedback and, more importantly, gave no opportunity for peer feedback. It was also clear to me that many students
were not comfortable with loosely focused, reflective writing assignments. Instead of removing the research journal
from the class, I decided that both of these issues could be addressed by
restructuring the research journal and moving it into an online course space.
With
experience in teaching classes completely online, where I never meet the
students, and in teaching in traditional classroom settings, I could quickly
see that using the threaded discussion format, one of the strengths of online
course management software, could remedy the two problems. Although asynchronous, the threaded
discussions would allow for more timely feedback from the instructor and would
open the possibilities for the students to give each other feedback. Setting up the journal in this way would also
allow for more structured discussion questions; students would have more
guidance and would be much less likely to post inappropriate or unfocused
material in response to the direct prompts.
I believed that this format also could eliminate or reduce the
procrastination problem.
In
practice, this was all true. The
research journals have been much more focused in recent semesters than before,
feedback has increased among the peers, and the instructor feedback is not
delayed for weeks. However, some limitations
remain. Some students still post late
and do not keep up with the assignments on a weekly basis. Some students give little or no feedback to
their peers, even if it is required or encouraged. The online format also changes the
instructor’s role. It is important to
log in regularly and keep up with new postings in order to provide better feedback. These additional requirements certainly add
to the instructor’s workload. Expectations need to be clearly defined, as
well, so that students do not expect the instructor to always be available
online. Although the hybrid approach is
not perfect, the increased discussion between students and instructor and the
improvement in the quality of the students’ reflective thinking and writing
have been significant.
Conclusion
Studies
have shown that students believe the hybrid approach improves communication and
interaction, both between students and between the students and instructors. For example, one study showed 66% of the
students saw a marked improvement in interaction while 27% felt that
communication was the same.[15] Another
survey showed that 90% of students in a hybrid course felt they learned as much
or more than in a traditional course.[16]
A high school even introduced hybrid courses and found it helped lower
their drop-out rates.[17]
An
added benefit was that the online course space served as an information center for
the course. Since the capability was
available, I posted the syllabus and assignments into the course space, meaning
that students who lost or misplaced their paper copies always had access to the
materials without having to contact me.
Although moving this part of the course into the online space increased
my workload and did not solve all problems completely, I have continued with
the hybrid approach, because the benefits have been significant enough to
warrant the extra effort. Using this
approach may work in many cases to increase peer interaction and enhance instructor
feedback.
Notes and
References
[1] Jeffrey R. Young, “Hybrid Teaching Seeks to
End the Divide Between Traditional and Online Instruction,” Chronicle of Higher Education, 48.28
(2002): A33.
[2]
[3]
[4] Christopher R.
Wolfe, “Learning and Teaching on the World Wide Web,” in Learning
and Teaching on the World Wide Web edited by Christopher R. Wolfe (San
Diego: Academic Press, 2000), pp. 1-2.
[5] For example, Gary S. Moore, Kathryn Winograd, and Dan Lange, You Can Teach Online (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2001); Margarita McVay
Lynch, The Online Educator (London;
New York: Routledge, 2002); Susan Ko
and Steve Rossen, Teaching
Online (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2001); Susan Sharpless
Smith, Web-Based Instruction
(Chicago: American Library Association, 2001); William Horton, Designing Web-Based Training (New York:
Wiley, 2000); Donald Hanna, 147 Practical
Tips for Teaching Online Groups (Madison: Atwood, 2000).
[7] Wolfe, pp. 3.
[8] See, for example, Giuseppe
Riva, “From Real to Virtual Communities: Cognition, Knowledge and Interaction
in the World Wide Web,” in Learning and
Teaching on the World Wide Web edited by Christopher R. Wolfe (San Diego:
Academic Press, 2000), pp. 131-151; David P. Diaz and Ryan B. Cartnal,
“Students’ Learning Styles in Two Classes: Online Distance Learning and
Equivalent On-Campus,” College Teaching
47.4 (1999): 103-5; William A. Doherty and Cleborne
D. Maddux, “An Investigation of Instruction and
Student Learning Styles in Internet-Based Community College Courses,” Computers in the School 19.3/4 (2002):
22-32; Rachel M. Pilkington and S. Aisha Walker,
“Facilitating Debate in Networked Learning: Reflecting on Online Synchronous
Discussion in Higher Education,” Instructional
Science 31 (2003): 41-63.
[9] Jennifer Wiley and Jonathan W. Schooler, “The Mental Web: Pedagogical and Cognitive
Implications of the Net,” in Learning
and Teaching on the World Wide Web edited by Christopher R. Wolfe (
[10] Priscilla Y. Romkema,
“The Case for Creating a Hybrid International Business Course,” Business Education Forum 57.4 (2003):
43-44+.
[11] Nancy Dewald, Ann Scholz-Crane, Austin Booth, and Cynthia Levine,
“Information Literacy at a Distance: Instructional Design Issues,” Journal of Academic Librarianship 26
(January 2000): 33-44.
[12] Leslie J. Reynolds, “Model for a Web-Based
Information Literacy Course: Design, Conversion, and Experiences,” Science & Technology Libraries
19.3/4 (2001): 165-178.
[13] Kate Manuel,
“Teaching an Online Information Literacy Course,” Reference Services Review 29.3 (2001): 219-228.
[14] Manuel, p. 222.
[15] Samuel K. Riffell
and Duncan H. Sibley, “Learning Online: Student Perceptions of a Hybrid
Learning Format,” Journal of College
Science Teaching 32.6 (2004): 394-399.
[16] Kay Mueggenberg,
“Taking Undergraduate Students Into the Online Learning Environment,’ Nurse Educator 28.6 (2003): 243-244.
[17] Thomas E. Oblender,
“A hybrid course model: one solution to the high online drop-out rate,” Learning and Leading with Technology
29.6 (2002): 42-46.