Addressing the Challenges of Engagement and Access in Teacher Education: Hybrid Learning
PROCEEDINGS
Qiuyun Lin, State University of New York--Plattsburgh, United States
Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in Jacksonville, Florida, United States ISBN 978-1-939797-07-0 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA
Abstract
Hybrid or blended learning, a mixture of online and face-to-face approaches, has been viewed as a viable tool to combat the limitation of both traditional lecture and fully online distance learning. This paper synthesizes current research in hybrid learning in order to find out if hybrid approaches to teaching can address the challenges of engagement and access in teacher education. The paper begins with a discussion of the need for a change in teacher education and the forces leading to the hybrid learning models. The strengths and limitations of both face-to-face and online learning are contrasted, and benefits of hybrid learning as evidenced from literature are demonstrated. The paper concludes that hybrid approaches to teaching should and can be an effective means for addressing the challenges of engagement and access in teacher education.
Citation
Lin, Q. (2014). Addressing the Challenges of Engagement and Access in Teacher Education: Hybrid Learning. In M. Searson & M. Ochoa (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2014--Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 364-370). Jacksonville, Florida, United States: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved March 19, 2024 from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/130772/.
© 2014 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)
References
View References & Citations Map- Aguirre, R.P., & Mitschke, D.B. (2011). Enhancing learning and learner satisfaction through the use of WebCT in social work education. Social Work Education, 30(7), 847-860.
- Allan, B. (2006). Blended learning: Tools for teaching and training. London: Facet Publishing.
- Al‐Qahtani, A.Y., & Higgins, S.E. (2013). Effects of traditional, blended and e‐learning on students' achievement in higher education. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(3), 220-234.
- Arora, A., & Raisinghani, M.S. (2011). Globalization, education and the knowledge economy: Changing international perspectives on learning and technology. International Journal of Web-Based Learning and Teaching Technologies, 6(3), i-iv.
- Barton, A.C. (2008). Creating hybrid spaces for engaging school science among urban middle school girls. American Educational Research Journal, 45, 68-103.
- Bersin, J. (2004). The blended learning book: Best practices, proven methodologies, and lessons learned. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.
- Blankson, J., & Kyei-Blankson, L. (2008). Nontraditional students’ perception of a blended course: Integrating synchronous online discussion and face-to-face instruction. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 19, 421-438.
- Bonk, C., Kim, K.J., & Zeng, T. (2006). Future directions of blended learning in higher education and workplace learning settings. In C.J. Bonk& C. Graham (Eds.), Handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs (pp. 550-567). San Franscisco: Pfeiffer.
- Bullen, M. (2007). Making the transition to e-learning: Strategies and issues. London: Information Science Publishing.
- Garrison, D.R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7, 95-105.
- Garrison, D.R., & Vaughan, N.D. (2008). Blended learning in higher education: Frameworks, principles, and guidelines. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley& Sons.
- Godwin-Jones, R. (2012). Challenging hegemonies in online learning. Language Learning& Technology, 16(2), 413.
- Hamilton, J., & Tee, S. (2013). Blended teaching and learning: A two-way systems approach. Higher Education Research& Development, 32(5), 748-764.
- Kaleta, R., Skibba, K., & Joosten, T. (2007). Discovering, designing, and delivering hybrid course. In A.G. Picciano (Ed.), Blended learning: Research perspectives. Needham, MA: Sloan-C.
- Kumar, S. (2003). An innovative method to enhance interaction during lecture sessions. Advances in Physiology Education, 27, 20-25.
- Kvavik, R. (2005). Convenience, communications, and control: How students use technology. In D. Oblinger& J. Oblinger (Eds.), Educating the net generation (pp. 7.1-7.20). Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE.
- Lin, Q. (2008). Student satisfactions in four mixed courses in elementary teacher education program. Internet and Higher Education, 11, 53-59.
- Lin, Q. (2009). Student views of hybrid learning: A one-year exploratory study. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 25(2), 57-66.
- Lin, Q. (2010). Becoming an innovative teacher educator: Designing and developing a successful hybrid course. New York, NY: Nova Science Publishers.
- Lin, Q. (2011). The role of web-based activities in mediating student interaction and engagement in four teacher education classes. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 7(1), 99-107.
- Marra, R.M. (2004). An online course to help teachers “use technology to enhance learning”: Successes and limitations. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 12, 411-429.
- Murphy, C.U., & Lick, D.W. (2005). Whole-faculty study groups: Creating professional learning communities that target student learning (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
- Robson, S., & Turner, Y. (2007). ‘Teaching is a co-learning experience’: Academics reflecting on learning and teaching in an ‘internationalized’ faculty. Teaching in Higher Education, 12, 41-54.
- Senn, G.J. (2008). Comparison of face-to-face and hybrid delivery of a course that requires technology skills development. Journal of Information Technology Education, 7, 267-283.
- Sharma, R.C. (2007). Cases on global e-learning practices: Successes and pitfalls. Hershey, PA: Information Science Publishing.
- Shea, P., & Bidjerano, T. (2012). Learning presence as a moderator in the community of inquiry model. Computers& Education, 59(2), 316-326.
- Skill, T.D., & Young, B.A. (2002). Embracing the hybrid model: Working at the intersections of virtual and physical learning spaces. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 92, 23-32.
- Smith, G.G., & Kurthen, H. (2007). Front-stage and back-stage in hybrid e-learning face-to-face courses. International Journal on E-Learning, 6, 455-474.
- Swenson, P.W., & Evans, M. (2003). Hybrid courses as learning communities. In S. Reisman, J.G. Flores, & D. Edge (Eds.), Electronic learning communities: Issues and practices (pp. 27-71). Greenwich, CT:
- Tutty, J.L., & Klein, J.D. (2008). Computer-mediated instruction: A comparison of online and face-to-face collaboration. Educational Technology Research Development, 56, 101-124.
- Yen, C., & Abdous, M. (2011). A study of the predictive relationships between faculty engagement, learner satisfaction and outcomes in multiple learning delivery modes. International Journal of Distance Education Technologies, 9(4), 57-70.
These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.
Suggest Corrections to References