You are here:

Faculty Best Practices Using Blended Learning in E-Learning and Face-to-Face Instruction Article

, ITESM-CCM, Mexico

International Journal on E-Learning Volume 5, Number 3, ISSN 1537-2456 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA

Abstract

Presenting a higher education case study from Mexico: “Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey” (ITESM-CCM) College, Mexico city campus, describing faculty best and worst practices using a blended learning approach in e-learning and face-to-face instruction. The article comments on conceptual definitions of blended learning, its epistemological and pedagogical bases and foundations, and the technological and instructional problems, difficulties, constraints, and successes that ITESM-CCM faculty has when they are using a blended learning approach.

Citation

Mortera-Gutiérrez, F. (2006). Faculty Best Practices Using Blended Learning in E-Learning and Face-to-Face Instruction. International Journal on E-Learning, 5(3), 313-337. Waynesville, NC USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved May 23, 2018 from .

Keywords

References

  1. Brown, D.G. (2001). Hybrid courses are best. Syllabus Retrieved January 25, 2006, from http://www.wfu.edu/~brown/Syllabus%20Articles/SylHybrid%20Courses.htm
  2. Dennis, A., & Kinney, S. (1998). Testing media richness theory in the new media: The effects of cues, feedback, and task equivocality. Information Systems Research, 9(3), 256-274. Dennis, A., & Valacich, J. (1999, January). Rethinking media richness: Towards a theory of media Synchronicity. Paper presented at the 32nd Hawaii International Conference of Systems Sciences, Honolulu, Hawaii.
  3. Driscoll, M. (2002). Blended learning. E-Learning 3(3), 54.
  4. Fox, M. (2002). Keeping the blended promise. E-Learning, 3(3), 26-29.
  5. Glaser, B.G., & Strauss, A.L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago: Aldine. Hofman, J.
  6. Kerres, M., & De Witt, C. (2003). A didactical framework for the design of blended learning arrangements. Journal of Educational Media, 28(2-3), 101-113.
  7. Lincoln, Y.S., & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  8. Lion, L. (1985). A proposal for naturalistic inquiry. Body image, self-concept, and sexual functioning of the dying person. Indianapolis, IN: Indiana University Press.
  9. Lombard, M., & Ditton, T. (1997). At the heart of it all: The concept of telepresence. Journal of Cumputer-Mediated Communication, 3(2).
  10. McIsaac, M.S., & Blocher, J.M. (1998). How research in distance education can affect practice. Educational Media International, 35(1), 43-47.
  11. Oravec, J.A. (2003). Blendin by blogging: Weblogs in blended learning initiatives. Journal of Educational Media, 28(2-3), 225-233.
  12. Osguthorpe, R. T., & Graham, C.R. (2003). Blended learning environments: Definitions and directions. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 4(3), 227-233.
  13. Reay, J. (2001). Blended learning: A fusion for the future. Knowledge Management Review 4(3), 1. Reigeluth, C.M. (1983). Instructional-design theories and models: An overview of their current status. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  14. Spradley, J. (1979). The ethnographic interview. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Va l ia than, P.
  15. Young, J.R. (2002). Hybrid teaching seeks to end the divide between traditional and online. Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved January 25, 2006, from http://chronicle.com/free/v48/i28/28a03301.htm

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact info@learntechlib.org.