Author: sksj13gmailcom

6/2/2018

Introduction

The intent of my literature search was to find ways to help instructors at my university who are teaching in synchronous blended learning environments. Of course instructors want the environment and learning experiences to be efficient, engaging, and effective for students. I want to develop some training for these instructors- more than what we’ve been doing. Currently, I’ve visited with them about strategies as needed, provided tutorials for web conferencing and audio and visual setup. I would like to do more though. I’ve taught face-to-face and online with lots of synchronous experience, however, I have no blended synchronous experience. 

I met a student in my last class whose title is Director of Telepresence at a university. She told me that her school has four coaches to train instructors how to teach in this environment. I knew they must have gotten information somewhere on which to base their training. I wanted to find that information, so that became my topic of interest. 

At first, I had some trouble putting a name on it. I hadn’t heard the term synchronous blended learning, so I tried searching a variety of terms that I came up with. Simultaneous face-to-face and online synchronous, blended learning, blended synchronous sessions… I set up several Google Scholar searches and found a couple articles that way. Then when I was looking in the dissertation database at Boise State, I found Sherry Conklin’s dissertation on the topic. With that, I found some good resources and the wording that I needed to do better searches. Since I have access to libraries and databases at Boise State and at John Brown University, I had no trouble finding and accessing the articles that I wanted to include. 

In my reading, I’ve found other terminology for this learning environment. I’ve discovered strategies for design and implementation in these settings. Many of the journals had common strategies or common issues that need solving. Common themes or needs include advance preparation of teachers, students, and the environment and seamless communication. I’ve also learned that there is a wide variety of environments included in the synchronous blended continuum. Of course some best practices and strategies would work better in one situation than another. Having the research from these different setups provides a better perspective from which to design training and advise instructors. 

The Blended Synchronous Design Framework (Bower et al., 2015) was a good find for me. It gave me a good topic for my Pecha Kucha and a start for helping instructors who use this format. I’m looking forward to synthesizing the design and implementation strategies from all of these articles and putting them together in some training for instructors at my university. First it was just some graduate education courses using this format, but now a number of graduate business courses are going this way too. I think it’s a trend that will continue to grow. There is plenty of room for research in this area especially in the format used at my school, and it’s a topic of interest to me, so it may be an area for me to continue my study.

1. Conklin, S.L. (2017). Students Perceptions of Interactions in a Blended Synchronous Learning Environment: A Case Study (Doctoral Dissertation).   Retrieved from https://scholarworks.boisestate.edu/td/1246/

Conklin (2017) conducted a case study that involved twenty-seven graduate students from two courses in an Education program and their two instructors. The researcher’s goal was to investigate the perceptions that students had about their various types of interactions in a blended synchronous learning environment. In this case, in each of the classes some of the students attended class online and others attended face-to-face.

The project use qualitative methodology with data collected through observation, surveys, and interviews. The researcher observed during half of the synchronous sessions. All interactions between students, student and instructor, and student and content were tracked and coded. Student perceptions of social presence were noted in the data. The Blended Synchronous Learning Design Framework (Bower et al) provided recommended best practices for this environment that would encourage student satisfaction. 

Generally, the perception of interactions was positive. The author noted specifics such as the importance of quality technology as well as the importance of active learning activities. Interaction was somewhat unbalanced and social presence varied across types of activities. Suggestions were made for improving these areas.

My intention in selecting this topic is to provide better training for instructors who will teach in this environment. The suggestions made for improving learning and perceptions in a blended synchronous learning environment along the Framework (Bower et al) mentioned above provide a foundation for developing training for instructors. 

We should host Blackboard Collaborate orientation sessions for instructors each term and for graduate students as well, similar to the session for our degree completion students. Just to get them more familiar with the environments and their functionality. Many instructors use the environment for office hours and meetings, but not necessarily for teaching. I’ve provided a video tour, but live sessions would be nice to offer. Repeating the study after implementing the suggestions would be interesting to see how perceptions might differ. 

2. Bower, M.. Dalgarno, B., Kennedy, G. E., Lee, M. J. W., & Kenney, J. (2015). Design and implementation factors in blended synchronous learning environments: Outcomes from a cross-case analysis. Computers & Education, 86, 1-17.

Bower, Dalgarno, Kennedy, Lee, and Kenny (2015) conducted a collective case study with cross-case analysis to examine  seven varied cases of blended synchronous learning. Students appreciate the convenience and flexibility offered with this model, and it is becoming more prevalent. Many times students who actually prefer attending class in person will choose to attend online if given the choice. 

Though benefits to blended synchronous learning are many, there are challenges too. Difficulty with technology seems to lead the way. Another problem stems from instructors trying to manage two separate groups of students at the same time and teach too. The perceptions of students vary according to where and how they attend the sessions. Many problems can be alleviated with training, advanced planning and preparation of the online learning space, and communication of instructions and expectations.

The data was collected before, during, and after the sessions and from the instructors as well as the students. Observation data was collected as were recordings of the blended sessions. In addition to classroom and web conferencing environments, virtual worlds were included in the study. The article goes into detail of each case study which provides varied and valuable information into various aspects of blended synchronous learning.

Reports show blended synchronous learning favorably. A Blended Synchronous Design Framework was created as a result of the analysis and synthesis of the data from this study. It includes design, implementation, and outcomes for pedagogy, technology, and logistics (p. 14).

This study seems especially valuable due to looking closely at seven cases. Since the cases look at different web environments, different class setups, and different types of courses, it packs a wealth of information. It will be resource to revisit. The framework that was provided is something to build on for training teachers for work in this environment. 

3. Eadt, M. J.. Woodcock, S., & Sisco, A. (2017). Employing the EPEC Hierarchy of Conditions (Version II) to evaluate the effectiveness of using synchronous technologies with multi-location student cohorts in the tertiary setting. International Review of Research in open and Distributed Learning, 18(3), 1-24.

Eadt, Woodcock, and  Sisco (2017) explored the level of success of multi-location synchronous learning in higher education. The setting was a “hub and spoke” setup with a main campus and several satellite campuses. Centra was the synchronous learning platform that was being used for communication between the sites. 58 students volunteered to participate in the study. 44 students were divided among three groups at the satellite campuses. Each of these groups were seated around one computer. 14 students attended using individual computers. The facilitators at each of the satellite locations had received 30 minutes of training to use the technology (p. 2). 

To measure the effectiveness of the sessions, the EPEC Hierarchy of Conditions (Version II) was used. It had been used in the past to support studies in e-learning, but not with students attending simultaneously from multiple locales. E stands for “ease of use.” P stands for “psychologically safe environment.” E stands for “e-learning self-efficacy.” C stands for “competency” (p. 4).

Following the thirteen week course, a survey was given using a mixed methods approach. Results varied according to the location or setting of the participants. One location had more technical problems than the others which attributed to a higher level of satisfaction with the multi-location synchronous learning situation. Participants in the other locations were generally more satisfied.

Complaints included technology problems, anxiety of using the technology, lack of training with the technology, slow internet, lag in communication while waiting for remote students to respond. There were positives as well. Students saw value in communicating with other students that they normally would not get the opportunity to work with. 

It was determined that EPEC Hierarchy was effective for this situation. However, a Version III is now in effect with the addition of two more factors – “tutor presence in group settings” and “appropriate technology tools” (p. 17).

After reading Sheri Conklin’s dissertation, and in my own experience with online learning, a best practice would be to have all students in every location log in to a device capable of interacting with each student. This would free up the teacher to interact with all students equally and more efficiently. Each student could communicate more easily with everyone else. With each person being able to communicate in the chat, lag in communication may not be as noticeable. This group may wish to include the Framework for Synchronous Blended Learning by Bower et al. (2015) in their effort to improve this environment for learning.         

4. Miller, M. (2014). Minds online. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Miller (2014) wrote a book in response to the growth in educational technology, growth in the field of cognitive psychology, and as a result of the focus on getting results which was promulgated by NCLB. Miller examined some common questions having to do with online learning – the quality, comparison to typical face-to-face courses, and cheating. She made good arguments in support of online learning for all of these points. 

She exposed problems with learning styles and why they don’t hold true. Miller focused on attention, memory, and thinking in the next part of the book. She shared a number of examples from tests and experiments that support her claims. A number of tools and types of assignments are discussed that are supported by how our thinking, memory, and attention work. Some good ideas for online courses were provided. 

In the third portion of the book, Miller discussed multimedia with a focus on multimedia principles, and then she turned to motivation. A couple chapters on gamification are included. Miller discussed how game elements can improve learning and how they work with the way we think. The last chapter wrapped up with a cohesive plan for teaching online in a way that works with how our brains are wired. She included a full syllabus with annotations for each element on how it works with our brains.

This book is really helpful for educators, developers, and  instructional designers. I will be reading it once again when I have more time, and referring back to it often. Though it wasn’t specifically written for blended synchronous learning environments, it is still valuable to those who design or teach in those environments, because of their heavy online component. Consideration should be given to the types of learning activities suggested and supported in this book when designing any online course, even those with blended synchronous components. 

5. Wang, Q., Huang, C., & Quek, C.L. (2018). Students’ perspectives on the design and implementation of a blended synchronous learning environment. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 34(1), 1-13.

Wang, Huang, and Quek (2018) conducted a study of a graduate education course that was held in a Blended Synchronous Learning Environment. The purpose was to find out how students perceived learning in this environment. The researchers mentioned several other names for this type of learning environment in the literature review. 

Wang et al. (2018) mentioned the study from the second article in this list. There is some research on the topic of blended synchronous learning, but it is limited especially where students attend sometimes face-to-face and sometimes online. In this situation, students attending online were not all at one remote location. Some were at home, some were at work or another location. There were off weeks in between sessions so that improvements could be made before the next session. Table 1 listed strategies the were implemented as they went on throughout the term. 

Students offered reflections which were designated as “participation, interaction and technology” (p. 7). Students liked the comfort, safety, and flexibility of the environment. Some problems were noted such as audio, communication between online and face-to-face students, communication between instructor and online students, students not having equipment needed, and apparently wandering away during the session.

Noted musts for BSLE environments are smooth communication, activities that transfer to the environment, good audio quality, and equal attention given by the instructor to the online and face-to-face students. 

There is plenty of room for research and problem-solving in this field. There is desire for it work seamlessly, but it must be intentional – you can’t just walk into a classroom and make it happen in a way that make students happy. I’m wondering if the researchers used all the strategies in BSLE Framework by Bower et al. (2015). A problem I see is that instructors are so busy that it’s difficult to find the time to prepare more than the content though it’s very important to do so.

6. Wang, Q., Quek, C.L., & Hu, X. (2017). Designing and improving a blended synchronous learning environment: An educational design research. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(3), 99-118.

Wang, Quek, and Hu (2017) used an educational design research approach to design, implement, and improve their BSLE for a graduate education course. Basically, it sounds like they may have used the same course and time frame as the research in the article above or at least a very similar example. Although in this case, the purpose was to showcase the design method, whereas in the other article it was to learn about the students’ perspective of the learning environment. 

Wang et al. (2017) defined blended synchronous learning and shared the benefits which included “teaching presence, social presence, and cognitive presence” (p. 101). Flexibility and economic benefits were also noted. The researchers also mentioned challenges with this learning environment which include well-managed blended synchronous sessions and communication. 

There were three stages in the project which include preliminary research, prototyping, and assessment. The research focused on four class sessions that were scheduled several weeks apart so that improvements – iteration of the prototype could take place in between sessions. I like how the researchers walk through the project, sharing the problem each week and the solution to the problem that was introduced in the following session. It seems like an interesting approach and one that I might consider. For each prototyping session, the design, implementation, and evaluation are provided. 

Students signed up to attend online for certain sessions. I thought this was an interesting approach. So students may have only attended online for one or two sessions. That would alleviate some dissatisfaction if any arose. Another valuable aspect to this is that students would see the experience from different viewpoints. This adds to the richness of the results.

The information in this article works well with the others that I’ve included. There is some overlap, but some new information too. A synthesis of strategies and tips from all them is something I’m interested in.

7. Cunningham, U. (2014). Teaching the disembodied: Othering and activity systems in a blended synchronous learning situation. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(6), 33-51.

Cunningham (2014) approached her study of blended learning in an effort to provide some classroom experience to online students who were somewhat unengaged in their course and interaction with each other. Online students were invited to participate during class sessions. Not all accepted the invitation, but some did. These students attended via Skype on an iPad. Each online student was represented with an iPad at the table. Face-to-face students were responsible for moving the student. This setup was used during the first half of the course. This was chosen as an improvement over just a video of the classroom. 

After receiving feedback from the participants, Cunningham changed the mode of attending. All online students became one group in Skype on one iPad. The instructor became responsible for moving the online students and facilitating for them. This was due to complaints from face-to-face students who didn’t want to help their online partners. Cunningham described the situation of the online students as being disembodied, or as students with a disability who may need assistance turning to the speaker or being moved to a table for a discussion.  

All students were surveyed anonymously at the end of the course. Some things to note – there was kind of an us and them culture and both groups viewed things differently. The online students felt unwelcome. Later attempts of blended synchronous learning utilized Adobe Connect and saw more movement of students to attending online.

This article is a memorable one. Thinking of online students as disembodied and talk of othering sounds kind of mystical. All that aside, interesting that these studies so far have involved teachers as students. I’m hoping to see some examples from other groups. In the two articles above, students signed up for a chance to attend online. So all of the students experienced the class both ways. I think that goes a long way toward empathy in this learning environment. This should be addressed in developing norms or classroom culture at the beginning of the course.

8. Hastie, M., Hung, I., Chen, N., & Kinshuk. (2010). A blended synchronous learning model for educational international collaboration. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 47(1), 9-24.

Hastie, Hung, Chen, and Kinshuk (2010) introduced a Blended Synchronous Learning Model as a result of a seven year international collaboration. Hastie et al. (2010) worked with students from early childhood through college providing range of synchronous learning experiences and emphasized the importance of connecting and collaborating globally to provide better education opportunities. 

The proposed model was made up of “five elements: the cyber classroom, the physical classroom, the teacher, the student, and a number of classrooms or participants” (p. 11). Table 1 shows a matrix with the possible combinations of a BSLM environment including nine possible options using these elements. Diagrams and examples explain each of these nine options. Mode 9 was considered the most holistic it allowed the most freedom for attendance. Both teachers and students could attend online or face-to-face. Schools may even collaborate to hire the best teachers.

The collaborative empirical study by two teachers followed and yielded “six teaching and learning networks” (p. 22). Network 2 reminded me of my synchronous sessions as a virtual teacher. All of the students who participated in the trial experienced significant growth academically and socially during the trial. The study resulted in five implications: a wide range of student locations, heavy use of virtual classroom and Web 2.0, benefits for both groups as a result of collaborating, support from within organizations, move to collaborations between groups rather than within a group.

This article is a bit dated. It may be helpful though in considering the the continuum of blended synchronous learning and also connectivism and international collaboration. Blended synchronous learning has really taken off in recent years. I wonder if the international collaboration in education has grown since 2010. It may be helpful in looking at each example for some best practices for each mode or place on the blended learning continuum.

9. Francescucci, A., & Foster, M. (2013). The VIRI (Virtual, Interactive, Real-Time, Instructor-Led) Classroom: The impact of blended synchronous online courses on student performance, engagement, and satisfaction. Canadian Journal of Higher
   Education, 43(3), 78-91.

Francescucci and Foster (2013) investigated the effects of the “VIRI (Virtual, Interactive, Real-Time, Instructor-Led) Classroom” on students’ “performance, engagement, and satisfaction” (p. 78). An experimental design was used. Two random sections of a introductory marketing course were taught by the same instructor. The only difference being was that one section met every other week in a virtual classroom. In this case they used WebEx Training Center. 

Pre and post surveys were given to both groups. The performance on assessments by the two groups was pretty typical. At the end of the course, attention, participation, and engagement scores were higher for the students who attended half of the lectures in the virtual classroom. Students attending virtually also answered questions on satisfaction which showed mostly favorable results for the environment. It was encouraging to see that students didn’t have technical problems in this instance. Even so, there were still a few areas where students aren’t one hundred percent behind the idea.

The satisfaction questions are good ones I think. I would consider adapting them for a project. I like the idea of the experimental design with a control group and a treatment group. It seems pretty straightforward. It seems that things went more smoothly in this instance than in the others I’ve read about. I’m wondering if this technology is better or if students and the instructor had more experience using this technology or if that fact that it’s business instead of education makes a difference. There were no negative consequences for students attending class in this mode, so it is an economic win for universities who can host more students without adding too much overhead. It’s a win for students who enjoy the flexibility.

Several interesting ideas for future research include repeating this across disciplines, instructors, and levels. Another idea is to hold all sessions in the virtual classroom as opposed to every other week.

10. Bower, M., Kenney, J., Dalgano, B., Lee, M. J. W., & Kennedy, G.E. (2014). Patterns and principles for blended synchronous learning: Engaging remote and face-to-face learners in rich-media real-time collaborative activities. Australasian Journal
    of Educational Technology, 30(3), 261-272.

Bower, Kenney, Dalgarno, Lee, and Kennedy (2015) selected seven instructors from a pool of 1,748 applicants for case studies involving blended synchronous learning. The cases involved a variety of disciplines, a variety of activities, and used video conferencing, web conferencing, and virtual worlds for hosting the online students in the face-to-face sessions. Data was taken from pre overviews, pre interviews, recordings of the sessions, observations, post surveys of students and of instructors. Several methods of coding were used to analyze the data. A cross-case analysis method was used.

The article describes each of the seven cases, providing some details and photos for each one. The last couple of cases involved using virtual worlds for hosting platforms. I have explored Second Life a little bit, however I have

  not considered it as a location for hosting my class. I’m interested in exploring that option and as described in case 7 using a virtual world and streaming the face-to-face class inside the virtual world. Sounds complicated, but interesting. If it could be done smoothly, it would definitely add interest. 

The next part of the article discussed issues that arose during the blended synchronous sessions. Many of the issues could be described as problems with communication. Other problems were a result of increased cognitive load due to having so much to manage in this situation. Strategies to counter these problems were provided as suggestions from the participating instructors. A number of good ideas are shared here. Then later they are formatted into the framework discussed in my second article on the this list. It is interesting to read this article now and take a look at each of the seven cases involved in the study – to see where the ideas in the framework came from. I was happy to see the variety in the cases since a number of case studies I see involve teacher education. 

11. Paskevicius, M., & Bortolin, K. (2015). Blending our practice: Using online and face-to-face methods to sustain community among faculty in an extended length professional development program. Innovations in Education and Teaching
    International, 53(6), 605-615.

Paskevicius and Bortolin (2015) conducted a study where they used blended learning as foundation for a nine month university professional development program. The idea was based on developing a community of inquiry. In the fall, there was a two day workshop to start the program. After that, face-to-face meetings were held every two months. The month before each face-to-face meeting, an online module was used. The article provides details on how the program was developed, the topics that were selected, and some of the activities that were used. 

A case study method was used with participants providing reflective data three times during the school year. In addition to the content learning and community building, it was hoped that instructors would become familiar with method of blended learning in the process. Some participants struggled to get everything done along with their teaching loads. Reminders were sent whole group and even to individuals when needed. Overall, the plan was successful for which it was designed and showed evidence of teaching presence, social presence, and cognitive presence.  

This article fell heavy to one end of the blended learning continuum, with no blended synchronous – just face-to-face and online. However, I decided to keep it in my collection here, since it does involve blended learning and faculty development. I think it may be useful as that is a department in which I work. I can see combining some ideas from here in with blended synchronous sessions – again to familiarize faculty with another mode of learning. It is helpful to see and use the LMS from the student side. As I was reading this article and thinking about faculty that I know, I feel like this may be too much – maybe take too much time. I think I would try to do something a little less time consuming, though I think a community of inquiry is a good thing.

12. Olson, J.S, & McCracken, F. E. (2014). Is it worth the effort?  The impact of incorporating synchronous lectures into an online course. Online
    Learning, 19 (2). Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1062939.pdf

Olson and McCracken (2014) investigated whether adding a synchronous component to a course would have an affect on achievement and whether it would affect perceptions of a social or learning community. To do this, a quasi-experimental design method was chosen. The research team selected a course that had two sections taught by the same instructor. Everything in the course design was kept the same for both courses except for a weekly synchronous lecture that students would attend using Adobe Connect. Students had the opportunity to opt out before the class started if they could not be available for synchronous attendance. The instructor offered two times each week for students to choose from in addition to recording the sessions. 

Achievement was analyzed by looking at three instances of grades during the course. Questions were added to the evaluations to determine any effect on social community or learning community. In the end, no improvement or negative results were found as a result of adding the synchronous lectures. The researchers noted that results may be skewed by the low numbers in the courses and the low participation in the surveys. Overall, they decided that thoughtful consideration should be given before adding a synchronous component and how it will be added and utilized since it may not work for students who need to be extremely flexible, and it can open up opportunities for problems.

Though this article doesn’t address blended synchronous, I kept it because it discussed synchronous sessions in higher education. My personal experience is more with K-12 and instructional coaching synchronous sessions, so any insight in this area is helpful to me. There was some good information on how the investigation was set up with an instructor who was not one of the designers. It also described the training of students and the instructor for using Adobe Connect before the first session. That is information I can use in my research on best practice for synchronous sessions in general. 

13. Szeto, E., & Cheng, A.Y.N. (2016). Towards a framework of interactions in a blended synchronous learning environment: What effects are there on students’ social presence experience. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(3), 487-503.

Szeto and Cheng (2016) conducted a case study which examined social presence by tracking, coding, and finding patterns in the various types of interactions in a blended synchronous learning situation. Data was collected via observations, interviews, discussion, and instructor reflections. Impressions of social presence were noted as well. In this case it was an engineering course with some students meeting face-to-face with the instructor and another group of students meeting at a remote location and attending via web-conferencing. No equipment had to be arranged as it was already in place. 

In addition to “Moore’s (1989) three types of interactions” commonly discussed, two new types were found, “instructor-content” and “instructor-student” (p. 496). It was noted where interactions began, who they were directed to, and in what context. Though the experience wasn’t seamless in this environment, everyone concluded that the learning was elevated. 

A framework was created as a result of the project which developers and designers can consult when planning for this environment. 

Something I thought was interesting was that the face-to-face group more often asked their peers for help and the online group more often asked the instructor for assistance. In addition, this was a good example of two locations by group. Where in some instances there is the face-to-face group and everyone else are in separate locations. Since we have three centers in addition to our main campus, this work is a nice example to have. In looking for best practices, I will try to categorize by the types of environments similar to Hastie et al. (2010) above.

14. Wang, Q., & Huang, C. (2018). Pedagogical, social and technical designs of a blended synchronous learning environment. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49(3), 451-462.

Wang and Huang (2018) researched a blended synchronous learning environment that was created with a pedagogical, social, and technical design. It seems to be the same course that was described in article number five above. It was a master’s course in an education program. Students mainly attended face-to-face, however four sessions were designed where several students could sign up to attend those sessions virtually. The virtual students attended from multiple locations. The instructor was highly experienced and was also one of the researchers.

The method used was a educational design research approach. The researchers used a rapid prototyping method, providing improvements to the experience with each iteration of the session. Data was taken mainly from observations and reflections. Helpful tables with very specific strategies are provided for pedagogical design, social design, and technical design. 

It was determined that blended synchronous learning environments are feasible and desirable formats for learning, however for the best experience for everyone it’s important to keep some key things in mind. Communication, sound quality, perceived instructor attention, and activities appropriate to both modes of learning along with technical savvy can provide a very positive learning experience. Where problems are describe, the article mentions other studies which had similar problems noted. 

I like that in this case online students were logging in from a number of locations. I also like that student sometimes attended face-to-face and sometimes online without having to commit to either way. I feel that this is probably the direction education is going and it is how our programs run at my school, so it helpful for me to read those stories. I was surprised that students who are teachers, would turn off their cameras, walk away, and not answer questions when called on, and this when working with an experienced instructor.