Blended Learning

State of the Nation

Ebba Ossiannilsson

Swedish Association for Distance Education, Kung Oscars Väg 27, Lund, Sweden

Keywords: Access, Blended Learning, Digitization, Flipped Classroom, ICDE, SDG4, Sustainability Goals, 4

Industrial

Revolution.

Abstract: Blended learning is accepted cross the globe in line with technological development and increased

digitization. Blended learning designs have led the trends in higher education in the past five editions of the

NMC Horizon Report, partly because of their flexibility, and convenience for students, although, it has been

in use since the 1960´s. The concept is time and context dependent. Blended learning involves learners,

teachers, administrators, technicians, leaders, and managers, all with a variety of aspirations and ambitions.

Blended learning is part of the innovative transformation of education in the 21st century, as blended learning

embraces personal quality learning. This widely recognized and personalized method engages, facilitates, and

supports learning. UNESCO and the Commonwealth of Learning emphasize this approach, as it makes

learning more flexible and convenient. This will help students be part of a global digital society. The blended

learning model requires changes in the roles of both teachers and learners. These changes are accompanied

by shifts in ownership and empowerment, where learners become prosumers and orchestrate their own

learning regarding time, space, setting, path, and pace. This paper is based on a report on blended learning,

state of the nation, written by the author on behalf of ICDE.

1 INTRODUCTION

Blended learning designs have headed the list of

trends in higher education the most recent five

editions of the NMC Horizon Report, partly because

of their role in increasing the flexibility and

convenience of students (Adams et al., 2017). Briefly,

blended learning is the fusion of online and face‐to‐

face contact between teachers and students.

This position paper is based on the Insight paper

authored by Ossiannilsson (2017) on behalf of the

International Council for Open and Distance

Education (ICDE). The purpose of that report was to

contribute to the discussion of blended learning,

particularly its development, implementation, effects,

and relationship with the emerging trends outlined by

the United Nations Educational Scientific, and

Culture Organization (UNESCO) global sustainable

goals (SDG) for education in 2030 (UNESCO, 2015a

2015b). The report targets a broad audience,

especially practitioners, policy makers and leaders. It

provides awareness, inspiration, insights, and

dialogues into blended learning and the current

debates. The report explains that blended learning is

based on a pedagogical approach rather than on

technology.

Blended learning is part of the innovative

transformation of education in the 21st century.

Blended learning involves people; as learners,

teachers, administrators, technicians, leaders, and

managers with a variety of aspirations and ambitions.

Blended learning embraces personal quality learning.

This widely recognized and personalized method

engages, facilitates, and supports learning. UNESCO

and the Commonwealth of Learning (COL),

emphasize this approach, as it makes learning more

flexible and convenient for the learners. This will help

students to be part of a global digital society.

The blended learning model requires changes in

the roles of both teachers and learners. These changes

are accompanied by shifts in ownership and

empowerment, where learners become prosumers

(Mc Loughlin & Lee, 2008), and orchestra their own

learning regarding time, space, setting, path, and

pace.

Ossiannilsson, E.

Blended Learning.

DOI: 10.5220/0006815005410547

In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU 2018), pages 541-547

ISBN: 978-989-758-291-2

541

2 METHOD

The study on blended learning, the state of the nation,

was based on an international desktop review of the

literature available on the Internet, which consisted of

mainly open-source articles found on Google Scholar

by using the Boolean search method. Most of the

literature could be categorized into one or more of the

following groupings; position papers by

governmental organizations, such as UNESCO,

Commonwealth of Learning (COL), the Organization

for Economic Co-operation and Development

(OECD), and the European Commission, scientific

journals and books, unpublished papers, such as blog

posts by researchers with international reputations.

3 FINDINGS

The findings from the desktop research was

categorized in main headings, which each was

elaborated, and discussed. Terminology, definitions,

history, and etymology, as well as models and

implementation, advantages, and disadvantages were

considered as main headings. In addition,

recommendations were given.

In this paper, the first section will cover blended

learning, definitions, history and etymology, Then,

models, implementation, and advantages, and

disadvantages are briefly discussed, and some

examples are presented. Last, conclusion and

recommendations are given

3.1 Blended Learning

In most educational programs, the blended learning

model is accepted cross the globe in line with

technological development and increased

digitization. Although, blended learning has been in

use since the 1960´s blended learning designs have

led the trends in higher education in the past five

editions of the NMC Horizon Report, partly because

of their flexibility, and convenience for students

(Adams et al., 2017).

Interpretations of the concept to blended learning

have varied over time, and it has been defined

variously worldwide. The term has been used since

the advent of the Internet and the World Wide Web in

the late 1990s. Although the concept was first

developed in the 1960s, the formal terminology used

to describe it did not take its current form until the late

1990s (Friesen, 2012).

In educational programs, both formal and

informal, the use of the blended learning model is

accepted as the mainstream approach to learning in

schools, colleges, and universities across the globe in

line with technological development and increased

digitization (Bates, 2016; Christiansen et al., 2013;

Christiansen Institute, 2015). Thus, the ecosystem of

blended learning must be embraced to ensure the

quality of a culture of blended learning

(Ossiannilsson, 2017).

The term blended learning is commonly

understood as referring to formal and classroom

methods. Blended learning environments include not

only the physical presence of teachers and students

but also the students’ ownership and control of the

time, place, setting, path, and pace at which their

learning takes place (Banditvilai, 2016; Bates, 2016;

Bonk, 2006; Clark, 2003; Daniel, 2016; Friesen,

2012; Latchem, 2017). Blended learning concerns

mindset and pedagogy more than it does technology

(Adams, et al., 2017).

Blended learning is considering as learners

centered, that offer flexibility, and ownership

throughout the learning process. In short, the concept

simply means the blend of virtual online digital

media, training with traditional classroom methods,

and face-to-face, instructor-led sessions.

The two most-often cited definitions are provided

by the Christiansen Institute and Wikipedia. The

former defined blended learning as:

[Blended learning is] a formal education program in

which a student learns; at least in part through online

delivery of content and instruction, with some

element of student control over time, place, path,

and/or pace; at least in part in a supervised brick-and

mortar location away from home, and the modalities

along each student’s learning path within a course or

subject are connected to provide an integrated

learning experience (Christiansen, Horn & Staker,

2013 p.8).

The latter defined it as follows:

Blended learning is a formal education program in

which a student learns at least in part through the

delivery of content and instruct on via digital and

online media with some element of student control

over time, place, path, or pace. (Wikipedia, 2017).

The Commonwealth of Learning (COL) (2015),

defined blended learning as an approach to teaching

and learning that combines different methods,

technologies, and resources to improve student

learning. The Online Learning Consortium (OLC,

2015) defined blended and hybrid learning as online

activities that supplemented by classroom meetings,

BLQE 2018 - Special Session on Blended Learning and Quality Enhancement

542

replacing a significant percentage of the required

face-to-face instruction. In other words, most course

activity is done online, but some face-to- face

instruction is required, such as lectures, discussions,

labs, and other in-person learning activities.

Because blended learning is highly context

dependent, the concept has been interpreted and

defined variously over time and in many cultural

contexts. The terms blended learning, hybrid

learning, technology-mediated instruction,

technology- enabled (enhanced) learning, web-

enhanced instruction, and mixed-mode instruction are

often used interchangeably in the research literature

(Bates, 2016, 2017; Commonwealth of Learning,

2015; Daniel, 2016). The term blended learning is

sometimes synonymous with the terms personalized

learning and differentiated instruction (Personalize

Learning, 2012).

Blended learning can thus be described in terms

of a continuum along which a series of variations in

practice and thinking can be arranged. Friesen (2012),

as well as Bates (2016) argues that blended learning

can be placed between fully online and fully face‐to‐

face courses. Below is an example of a common

image of blended learning, which clearly shows the

merge, of the brick and mortar model (classroom

based), and the online learning model (computer

based). It shows explicit how learning is more and

more blurred in the variety of learning spaces.

Figure 1: Blended learning, a common model.

3.2 Blended Learning, Models, and

Implementation

Blended learning is advantageous for learners,

teachers, and institutions if visions, strategies,

infrastructure, qualitative blended learning design,

capacity building, and teacher training are in place

(Geissler, 2014). These advantages may be limited by

the absence of attention of any of these factors.

To reach the UNESCO goals for education in

2030 (UNESCO 2015a 2015b), the practice of

education has to change, transform, and innovate. The

goal of education is to prepare students for an

unknown and uncertain future and to prepare for jobs

that do not yet exist. Therefore, there is a need to

move beyond knowledge, and to recall focusing on

the competencies and skills needed for lifelong

learners and active global citizens, who will need to

be flexible, entrepreneurial, collaborative, agile, and

adaptable. Hence, today’s students must harness the

power of digital technologies and their social

networks to support continued learning. Innovation

must be an integral part of learning ethics to ensure

that faculties, and institutions are agile in responding

to the external market and associated factors.

Educational institutions must not only adapt but also

to take the lead in innovation and cutting-edge

technologies to enhance learning spaces. Hence,

Adam et al. (2017) prioritized the following for

empowering, and successful implementation:

 Blended learning design

 Collaborative learning

 Growing focus on measuring learning

 Redesigning learning spaces

 Advancing cultures of innovation

 Deepening learning approaches

Banditvilai (2016) emphasized that a blended

learning model could comprise several components,

such as instructor-delivered content, e-learning,

webinars, conference calls, live or online sessions

with instructors, and other media and platforms’, such

as Facebook, e-mail, chatrooms, blogs, podcasting,

Twitter, YouTube, Skype, and web boards.

The interactions or cross actions in digital spaces

(Jahnke, 2016) have become more complex than ever.

Humans are also more mobile than ever before, and

doubly so, not only because they are constantly on the

Figure 2: The “blend” in the blended learning model.

Blended Learning

543

move but also because almost everything can be

accessed through mobile devices such as smartphones

and tablets and the software applications (i.e., apps)

that are designed to run on them (Sharples et al.,

2016). In Figure 2 below the blend in blended

learning is illustrated as by Mountain House High

School, Mountain House, CA.

The iNACOL framework for online and blended

learning, is a well-known identified model for

successful implementation, and quality enhancement

(Christiansen Institute, 2015; Christiansen, Horn &

Staker, 2013; Powell, Rabbi & Kennedy, 2014),

Figure 3. In the model 12 key competencies are

identified that are combined into four larger domains.

This framework emphasizes the mindsets, qualities,

and skills that support practioners’ creative and

continuous improvement as well as their ability to

thrive amidst change. The framework is adapted from

the TPACK model (Technology, People, Assessment,

Content and Curricula), a framework for

understanding quality online blended teaching and

learning, which addresses all aspects of a student-

centered, functional description of the key elements

in an approach to systemic educational

transformation.

The iNACAL framework emphasizes the

mindsets, qualities, and skills that support

practitioners. Efficient and effective learning starts

with an effective mindset, which is one domain in the

iNACAL framework for blended learning. This

framework is one of the models studied by educators

to understand their evolving role in blended learning

environments. This framework offers insights in to

the knowledge, skills, and dispositions needed to

ensure that new instructional methods are successful.

Figure 3: The iNACOL framework for blended learning.

Porter and Graham (2016) proposed a three-stage

framework for the institutional adoption of blended

learning: 1) awareness and exploration; 2) adoption

and early implementation; 3) mature implementation

and growth. Their framework also identifies the key

strategy, structure, and support issues that universities

may address at each stage, which were emphasized by

Ossiannilsson et al., (2015) in their recommendations

for a quality model of open online learning.

The case studies of UNESCO Bangkok and the

Education University of Hong Kong (2016) could be

used as examples by institutional leaders and

policymakers to implement and support blended

learning based on current and future needs,

particularly if they emphasized the following:

 In the process of implementing blended

learning strategies, attention should be paid

to learning inputs, processes, assessments

and the measurement of overall personal

development.

 In implementing a holistic approach,

teachers and administrators should be well

prepared, motivated, and have sufficient

time and resources.

 To succeed, students need creative learning

opportunities that include guidance by well-

supported faculty in dynamic learning

environments.

 Institutional leadership must be an attuned to

the needs of staff and students, as well as the

need for an overall strategy to improve

learning experiences both online and in

person.

Two more models were described in the Insight

paper, namely the open pedagogy model (Wiley,

2013), and mobile learning models. As they are more

general pedagogic models, and truly well known, it

will go too far ahead to describe them here in this

paper. Instead another useful model, when it comes to

maturity and purpose for implementing technology,

or enhancing the quality in blended learning to be

considered is the substitution, augmentation,

modification, redefinition model (SAMR) by

Puentedura (n.d) The model offers a method of

determining the effects of computer technology on

teaching and learning. The SAMR model also

provides indictors of progress that adopters of

educational technology often follow as they learn to

use it in teaching and learning (see Figure 4).

BLQE 2018 - Special Session on Blended Learning and Quality Enhancement

544

Figure 4: The SAMR model.

In the Insight paper on blended learning, models

on quality, and quality enhancement also were

elaborated, and models were discussed. In

Ossiannilsson et al.’s (2015) study on quality models

for open online learning, including blended learning,

found that although the models had different features,

dimensions, or categories, they all had some features

in common, such as services, products, and

management, and they all emphasized the student-

centered approach, see Figure 4. One example of such

a model was developed by the European Association

of Distance Teaching Universities (EADTU) E-

excellence Associates Label (Kear at al., 2016). It is

worth stressing the importance of leadership,

management, incentives, and recognition in quality

models. Ossiannilsson et al.,’s findings included the

importance of a holistic approach and an ecosystem.

Figure 5: Significant areas related to quality in open online

learning including e-learning (Ossiannilsson, 2012,

Ossiannilsson et al., 2015).

4 CONCLUSIONS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

The blended learning method is becoming

increasingly common. Blended learning concerns

mindset and pedagogy more than it does technology.

More important than its technical definition is the

purpose of blended learning, specifically the reasons

that it’s adoption as an instructional modality is

important for the future of learning. Thus, the

ecosystem of blended learning has to be embraced to

cultivate a culture of quality in blended learning.

Blended learning is a powerful method for

differentiating and personalizing instruction, as well

as for moving away from time based models of

achievement toward competency-based ones.

Blending is a strategy that helps teachers achieve

what they strive to do every day, to understand and

enable each student to reach the very highest levels of

educational mastery (Powell, Rabbi, & Kennedy,

2014). Blended learning not only requires teachers to

understand and have deep knowledge in their areas of

content expertise but also understand and use online

and blended modes of pedagogy. The blended

learning model requires changes in the roles of not

only teachers but also learners who are active,

responsible collaborators, and even creators of their

own learning materials, as McLaughlin and Lee

(2008) argued, learners are prosumers. This change in

roles is accompanied by shift s in ownership and

empowerment in which learners take control of and

orchestrate their own learning.

In summary, the following recommendations

were provided for the successful implementation and

sustainability of culture of quality in blended

learning.

1. Base success on people, that is, the human

dimension.

2. Promote the ownership of learning by

allowing personal learning.

3. Ensure that strategies, funding, and visions

are understandable to all.

4. Implement a culture of smart learning, open

pedagogy, and mobile learning.

5. Enable ubiquitous learning, time (any time),

space (anywhere), path, mode, and access.

6. Apply the iNACOL framework of blended

learning.

7. Apply the UNESCO Bangkok and the

Education University of Hong Kong

recommendations.

8. Support and facilitate capacity building,

incentives, and recognition in all staff.

9. Cultivate a culture of quality and an ecology

of blended learning.

10. Encompass digitization throughout the

curricula and assessments, including

finding, evaluating, creating, disseminating,

and communicating.

Blended Learning

545

11. Ensure that blended learning concerns all

stakeholders at micro, - meso, - and macro

levels.

12. Ensure that leadership and management at

all levels support and facilitate the culture

and quality of blended learning.

13. Conduct research that focuses on blended

learning per se, not only in comparison with

other teaching and learning models.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author would like to thank International Council

for Open and Distance Education (ICDE) for the

opportunity to author and contribute to their Insight

paper, entitled Blended learning. State of the Nation.

REFERENCES

Adams Becker, S., Cummins, M., Davis, A., Freeman, A.,

Hall Giesinger, C., & Ananthanarayanan, V. (2017).

NMC Horizon report: 2017 higher education edition.

Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.

Banditvilai, C. (2016). Enhancing students’ languages

skills through blended learning. The Electronic Journal

of e-Learning, 14(3), 220–229.

Bates, T. (2015). Teaching in a digital age: Guidelines for

designing teaching and learning for a digital age. [Web

log message]. Retrieved from https://opentextbc.ca/

teachinginadigitalage/

Bates, T. (2016, December 12). Re: Are you ready for

blended learning? [Web log post]. Retrieved from

https://www.tonybates.ca/tag/blended-learning/

Bonk, C. J., & Graham, C. R. (2006). The handbook of

blended learning environments: Global perspectives,

local designs. San Francisco: Jossey‐ Bass/ Pfeifer.

Christensen Institute (2015). Blended learning definitions.

Retrieved from https://www.christensenins tute.org/

blended-learning-definitions-and-models/

Christansen, C., Horn, M., & Staker, H. (2013). Is K-12

blended leaning disruptive? An introduction to the

theory of hybrids. Clayton Christensen’s Institute for

disruptive innovation.

Clark, D. (2003). Blended learning: An EPIC whitepaper.

Retrieved from http://www.scribd.com/ doc/84278560/

Clark‐ D‐ Blended‐ Learning

Commonwealth of Learning. (2015). Open and distance

learning: Key terms and definitions. Retrieved from

http://oasis.col.org/bitstream/handle/11599/829/Defini

tions_ODL%20key%20terms_20150522.pdf?sequence

Commonwealth of Learning. (2017). Connections, 22,2.

Daniel, J. (2016, February 24). Making sense of blended

learning: Treasuring an older tradition or finding a

better future? Contact North|Contact Nord Research

Associate [Web log message]. Retrieved from

https://teachonline.ca/tools-trends/blended-learning-su

ccessful-design-delivery-and-student-engagement/mak

ing-sense-blended-learning-treasuring-older-tradition-

or- finding-better-future

Friesen, N. (2012). Defining blended learning. Retrieved

from http://learningspaces.org/papers/Defining_Blend

ed_Learning_NF.pdf

Geissler, N. (2014). Blended learning approaches to teacher

training. UNESCO Mobile Week. Deutsche

Gesellschaft fr International Zusammenarbeit (GIZ)

GmbH. Retrieved from http:// www.unesco.org/new/

en/unesco/themes/icts/m4ed/unesco-mobile-learning-

week-2014/symposium/breakout-sessions/blended-

learning-approaches/

Horn, M., & Staker, H. (2014). Blended: Using disruptive

innovation to improve eschools. Christiansen Instiitute.

SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass.

Jahnke, I. (2016). Digital didactical designs: Teaching and

learning in crossation spaces. New York: Routledge.

Kear, K., Rosewell, J, Williams, K. Ossiannilsson, E.,

Rodrigo, C., Sánchez, A., Paniagua, E., Santamaría

Lancho, M., Vyt, A. & Harvey Mellar, H. (2016).

Quality assessment for e-learning: A benchmarking

approach. Eds: K. Kear and J. Rosewell. 3rd edition.

Heerlen: The European Association of Distance

Teaching Universities (EADTU).

Latchem, C. (Ed.). (2017). Using ICTs and blended

learning in transforming TVET. Burnaby: United

Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural

Organization (UNESCO). Retrieved from http://

unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002474/247495e.pdf

McLoughlin, C., & Lee, M. (2008). The three Ps of

pedagogy for the networked society: Personalization,

participation, and productivity. International Journal of

Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 20(1), 10–

27.

OECD. (2016). Education 2030: The future we want. The

Future of Education and Skills: Education2030.

Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/edu/school/educa

on-2030.htm

Online Learning Consortium. (2015). Updated e-learning

definitions. Retrieved from https://onlinelearning

consortium.org/updated-e-learning-de ni ons-2/

Ossiannilsson, E. (2017). Blended learning. State of the

nation. Oslo: The International Council for Open and

Distance Education

Ossiannilsson, E., Williams, K., Camilleri, A., & Brown,

M. (2015). Quality models in online and open education

around the globe: State of the art and recommendation.

The ICDE report series. Oslo: The International

Council for Open and Distance Education.

Personalize Learning. (2012, September24). Re: Blended

learning is not the only way to personalize learning.

[Web log message]. Retrieved from http://www.

personalizelearning.com/2012/09/blended- learning-is-

not-only-way-to.html

Porter, W.W., & Graham, C. R. (2016). Institutional drivers

and barriers to faculty adoption of blended learning in

BLQE 2018 - Special Session on Blended Learning and Quality Enhancement

546

higher education. British Journal of Educational

Technology, 47, 748–762. doi:10.1111/ bjet.12269

Powell, A., Rabbi, B., & Kennedy, K. (Eds.). (2014).

iNACOL blended learning teacher competency

framework: iNACOL in partnership with The Learning

Accelerator. iNACOL, The International Association

forK-12 Online Learning, Retrieved from https://www.

inacol.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/iNACOL-Blen

ded-Learning-Teacher-Competency-Framework.pdf

Puentedura. (n.d.). The SAMR Model: from Enhancement

to Transformation.

Saritepeci, M., & Cakir, H. (2015). The effect of blended

learning environments on student motivation and

student engagement: A study on social studies course.

Education and Science, 40(177), 203– 216.

Sharples, M., de Roock, R., Ferguson, R., Gaved, M.,

Herodotou, C., Koh, E., Kukulska-Hulme, A.,...Wong,

L. H. (2016). Innovating pedagogy2016: Open

University innovation report5. Milton Keynes: The

Open University.

Schwab, K. (2016). The 4thindustrial revolution. Geneva:

World Economic Forum.

UNESCO. (2015a). Education 2030 Framework for Ac on:

Towards inclusive and equitable quality education and

lifelong learning for all. Paris: UNESCO.

UNESCO. (2015b). UNESCO and Education 2030: Frame-

work for action and sustainability development goals4,

SDG4. Retrieved from http://en.unesco.org/sdgs

UNESCO. (2016). Blended learning for quality in higher

education: Selected case studies on implementation in

the Asia-Pacific. Lim, Cher Ping, & Libing Wang

(Eds.). Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific,

and Cultural Organization. Retrieved from

http://unesdoc.unesco.org/

images/0024/002468/246851E.pdf

Wiley, D. (2013, October 21). What is open pedagogy?

[Web log message]. Retrieved from https://

opencontent.org/blog/archives/2975

Wikipedia (2015a). Blended learning. Retrieved from

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blended_learning

Blended Learning

547