You are here:

Leveraging the Power of Hybrid Learning: Teaching Sustainability Topics to Future Teachers
PROCEEDINGS

, , Arizona State University, United States

E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, in Las Vegas, NV, USA ISBN 978-1-939797-05-6 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), San Diego, CA

Abstract

This paper describes Sustainability Science for Teachers, a hybrid course in development at a major research-extensive university in the desert southwest that integrates the use of technology to teach related concepts in a meaningful way. Part of a programmatic education reform aimed toward improving science content knowledge among preservice elementary teachers, the goal of the course is for future educators to gain knowledge, values, and skills to address the environmental and social challenges we face in coming decades. Informal interviews and surveys were deployed to identify and evaluate the hybrid format from both the student and instructor perspective. The research findings describe the advantages and disadvantages of the hybrid format. In general, favorable remarks are elicited from both the instructors and students citing structural and pedagogical advantages with the hybrid format.

Citation

Archambault, L. & Warren, A. (2013). Leveraging the Power of Hybrid Learning: Teaching Sustainability Topics to Future Teachers. In T. Bastiaens & G. Marks (Eds.), Proceedings of E-Learn 2013--World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 1721-1726). Las Vegas, NV, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved December 10, 2018 from .

View References & Citations Map

References

  1. Bernard, R.M., Abrami, P.C., Borokhovski, E., Wade, C.A., Tamim, R.M., Surkes, M.A., & Bethel, E.C. (2009). A meta-analysis of three types of interaction treatments in distance education. Review of Educational Research, 79(3), 1243–1289.
  2. Bernard, R.M., Abrami, P.C., Lou, Y., Borokhovski, E., Wade, A., Wozney, L., Wallet, P.A., Fiset, M., Huang, B. (2004). How does distance education compare with classroom instruction? A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Review of Educational Research, 74(3), 379-439.
  3. Bruner, D. (2006). The Potential of the Hybrid Course Vis-à-vis Online and Traditional Courses. Teaching Theology and Religion, 9 (4), 229-235.
  4. Bryant, B., & Charmaz, K. (2010). The Sage Handbook of Grounded Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  5. Burbules, N.C., & Callister, T.A. (2000). Universities in transition: The promise and challenge of new technologies. Teachers College Record, 102(2), 271–293.
  6. Castle, S., and McGuire, C. (2010). An analysis of student self-assessment of online, blended, and face-to-face learning environments: Implications for sustainable education delivery. International Education Studies: Canadian Center of Science and Education, 3(3), 36-40.
  7. Cavanaugh, C., Gillan, K.J., Kromrey, J., Hess, M., & Blomeyer, R. (2004). The effects of distance education on K-12 student outcomes: A meta-analysis (P. 39). Naperville, IL: Learning Point Associates. Retrieved from
  8. Cooper, L.W. (2001). A comparison of online and traditional computer application classes. Technological Horizons in Education Journal, 28(8), 52-58.
  9. Glaser, B.G., & Strauss, A.L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine Publishing Company.
  10. Lewis, G.S. (2010). I would have had more success if... : Student reflections on their performance in online and blended courses. American Journal of Business Education, 3(11), 13-21.
  11. Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2009). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-basedpractices/finalreport.pdf
  12. Nolet, V. (2009). Preparing sustainability-literate teachers. Teachers College Record, 111(2), 409-422.
  13. Orhan, F. (2008) Redesigning a Course for Blended Learning Environment. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 9, 54-66.
  14. Russell, T.L. (1999). No significant difference phenomenon. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina State University. Retrieved from http://www.nosignificantdifference.org/ Schulman, A.H. & Sims, R.L. (1999). Learning in the online format versus an in-class format: An experimental study. Technological Horizons in Education Journal, 26(11), 54-56.
  15. 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.
  16. Strauss, A. & Corbin. J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Sustainability Science Education (SSE). (2012). About page. Retrieved from: http://sustainabilityscienceeducation.asu.edu/about/Young,JeffreyR.2002.“‘Hybrid’TeachingSeekstoEndtheDivideBetweenTraditionalandOnlineInstruction.”TheChronicleofHigherEducation48,no.28(March22),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.