Blended Learning- a missed opportunity?

This session will ask whether blended learning is under-developed in US higher education, and if that represents a missed opportunity.

Blended learning is defined here as some combination of in-person and online learning in a higher education course or program.

Our hypothesis is that blended learning is under-developed. Reasons include problems of data and definition, norms of institutional decision-making, and debate over institutional strategy and alignment.

On the one hand, blended enrollment continues to grow strongly. In Fall 2016, the most recent year of federal data available, students reported taking at least one fully distance course at undergraduate level topped three million, about a million more than fully online undergraduates. Indeed, blended students have grown faster- up 19% since 2012, compared to only 8% online growth. In Fall 2016, blended students accounted for 18% of all undergraduates.

Many schools enable or encourage students to take a mix of online, blended and in-person courses, based on student preference and to accommodate working students and those who live further from campus.

But what do we know about blended students? The federal definition is limited to students taking at least one fully distance course. Students taking one or more courses that combine distance and in-person elements are not counted. Even within the “some distance” federal definition, a wide range of students are lumped together- everything from students taking one online course to many, with no insight into the structure or activities within particular courses. Combinations of online and blended courses are not visible.

Also, it is rare for a school to position delivery mode in terms of pedagogic effectiveness rather than personal choice, and to commit to a particular form of blended learning.

There are interesting tensions between the findings of student surveys, institutional surveys and the literature on educational effectiveness when it comes to the relative prioritization of online, blended and campus-based courses and programs:

• Student Surveys: over the years, Eduventures surveys of prospective adult learners have found growing interest in forms of blended learning, at the expense of fully online and fully in-person learning.

• Institutional Surveys. The CHLOE survey- Changing Landscape of Online Education- a joint initiative of Quality Matters and Eduventures, reported that online learning leaders in colleges and universities tend to prioritize fully online over blended courses and programs.

• Literature. Successive studies, including widely publicized meta-analyses, have consistently found (despite breadth of definition) that blended students tend to out-perform fully online and in-person students in terms of retention and completion. The new federal “Outcomes” data, that reports program completion rates for non-traditional undergraduates, shows below-average results for fully distance institutions.

Based on such evidence, student preference and research findings appear at odds with institutional strategy and investment. This is despite the fact that most institutions are place-based and campus-based, and it may be in their long-term interest to align online learning with campus assets. Moreover, the majority of fully online students live within fifty miles of their institution, suggesting more opportunity for blended learning. Far from mere personal preference, delivery mode might be characterized as core to mission- impacting the student experience, graduate outcomes and ultimately institutional brand.

Possible explanations for enthusiasm for fully online include institutional focus on online learning as the most practical option for most adult learners, even if online is not always adults’ first preference. Another possibility is that blended courses and programs are more complicated to design, build and run, requiring faculty and administrators to think through the merits of specific online and in-person activities. By comparison, in-person norms and the convenience emphasis central to online learning may seem straightforward. The combination of the array of choices implied by blended learning, and institutional cultures that tend to favor faculty-led decision-making, may inhibit institutional commitment to particular blended models at scale.  

As well as discuss these matters, the presenters will highlight selected institutional examples of enterprise-level blended learning implementation. The question will be posed whether institutions should pay more attention to blended learning as a long-term strategy.

The presenters draw on years of experience developing, researching and evaluating online and blended learning in US higher education and beyond. This presentation cross-references a range of sources in search of a clearer understanding of the landscape.

The presenters will invite comments and questions from the audience.