ArticlePDF Available
By Allison Rossett and Rebecca Vaughan Frazee
Copyright 2006
American Management Association
Blended Learning Opportunities
What Is Blended Learning?
Why Blend?
What Goes into a Blend?
What Types of Blending Make Sense?
How Does Blended Learning Affect What People Do?
QUICKLIST 1: Are Employees Ready for Blended Learning?
QUICKLIST 2: Are Managers Ready for Blended Learning?
QUICKLIST 3: Are Executives Readying the Organization
for Blended Learning?
How Do We Look at the Effectiveness of Blends?
Blended Learning: Bridging the Classroom and the Workplace
QUICKLIST 4: I Want to Learn More About Blended Learning
What is blended learning?
In 1958 the milk monitors at Public School 164 in New York City
experienced a blend of approaches to help them learn to distribute the milk
to other youngsters. Loading and carrying was demonstrated. They were
coached by their supervisor on handling leaks and mashed cartons, and
moving from one classroom to the other in safe and orderly fashion. They
were paired with a more experienced monitor to try milk delivery the first
few times.
Ingrid, a German engineer, wanted to become a fluent English speaker. She
conversed in English in online chat rooms. She vacationed in English
speaking places and hung out in cafes. She studied English language tapes.
And she sought a British boyfriend who spoke not a word of German.
It’s not different for financial services representatives today. Many go to
class. They rely on a manager for coaching. And they have materials to
which they refer when they need to know more about a product or
situation. These materials are available any time, anywhere, online from a
comprehensive support system.
The point, of course, is that milk monitors, language students, financial
services professionals, and everybody else, no matter their century or age,
are well served by something not novel or radical or trendy or even
necessarily techie. They profit from a well-crafted blend.
What is blended learning?
Blended learning (BL) integrates seemingly opposite
approaches, such as formal and informal learning, face-to-face
and online experiences, directed paths and reliance on self-
direction, and digital references and collegial connections,
in order to achieve individual and organizational goals.
BL is devoted to learning and performance. From the organization’s
perspective, blended learning is about improving performance and
achieving business objectives. From the employee’s perspective, blending
is about getting work done, when and where a need emerges, more
typically at a time and place of the employee’s choosing.
BL takes many forms. Blending might involve structured or casual
interactions with instructors, peers, coaches, mentors, and supervisors.
It happens in classrooms, on ships, at home, and in the field, even the
battlefield. It might involve time spent independently with reading
material, online modules, databases, reference manuals, templates,
checklists, worked examples, or hours engaged on a group assignment or
conversation with peers. Technology is central to some blends, less a part
of others.
BL addresses that nagging concern about transfer of training. BL is the
next step in a continuing commitment to systems, results, and
performance. If you are concerned about lessons that stop at the
classroom door and events limited to time and place, BL has much for
BL relies on compelling assets and experiences. As we move from
instructors to blends, from classroom to field, participation and results
are the hands of employees. Employees can elect to skip entire programs
or elements that feel superficial, complicated, or irrelevant, in favor of
their “real work.” Thus, BL programs and assets must present themselves
as worthwhile and manageable.
BL capitalizes on the resident smarts in the organization. BL presses
people and organizations to find, store, stir, and share what they know. A
database might help sales people re-use parts of proposals. Far-flung hotel
administrators can “ask the experts” through FAQs, email, phone calls, or
live video streams. Employees may turn to their supervisors to practice a
skill or explore an idea.
BL promotes connections and conversations. BL encourages the
organization to extend lessons and conversations far beyond the
classroom and into the workplace through coaching, e-coaching, and
online communities. A sales person who has learned about a new product
can chat with more experienced colleagues attempting to bring that
product to Asia. An executive can reach out for expert views from a
trusted e-coach. A researcher can reflect with others on the investment
team about how a natural disaster should influence their choices.
BL guides, directs and tracks. BL must do two things: first, it must propel
action, showing employees how to benefit from the blend, how far they
have come, where else they need to go, and what else is possible; and
second, it must simultaneously encourage smart choices and involvement.
Diagnostics, assessments and feedback, menus, and sample paths can be
used to tailor experiences, assets and activities.
Why blend?
Blended learning has a growing presence in workforce learning and
performance. Kim and colleagues’ 2005 survey of 200 training professionals
in the United States predicted an increase in the use of BL in their
organizations. In another survey of almost 300 training professionals in the
US and UK, ASTD and Balance Learning reported that more than two-
thirds of respondents ranked blended learning as “the most effective and
cost-efficient form of training,”and indicated that “blended learning will
make up about 30% of all corporate training budgets by 2006, (Sparrow,
That others are doing it is interesting, but not conclusive. Far more
compelling are studies and experiences that suggest BL works. What might
blended learning do for you?
• Nurture a world-class and worldwide workforce
Globalization, offshore outsourcing, and franchising are changing the
nature of organizations and the needs, location and experiences of their
employees. Executives expect workforce learning to translate into
performance, and to make contributions—big ones. Do they want their
sales people in class or out in the field? Do they want consultants with each
other or customers? Do they want knowledge acquired in class nine months
ago or access to ideas and perspectives that reflect what is happening today?
As organizations have shifted to customized and boundaryless services,
knowledge and expertise must follow and surround peripatetic employees.
• Provide consistent and updated messages
Instructors are a great resource during training, but their messages
sometimes differ from one to another, and their smarts depart after class.
Technology, on the other hand, can deliver standardized messages,
Everyone is overworked and no one has any time for traditional
development approaches and methods. Organizations need simpler
management-driven approaches and tools that are designed to make
continuous learning and development an integral part of the process.
(Sullivan, 2005, July)
instructional and otherwise, consistently, tirelessly, swiftly, repeatedly,
patiently, around the globe. Online modules, knowledge bases, and archived
presentations do not get jet lag.
• Exploit technology
Dropping prices and increasing functionality mean that more people
around the world are plugging in, with and without wires. The number of
PCs is projected to surpass 1 billion in 2007, and the number of PDAs is
anticipated to reach almost 60 million by 2008, with most boasting wireless
email and web browsing capabilities (eTForecasts, 2005). Ipsos-Insight
reported that at least two-thirds of all Internet users connect via high
speed broadband (Modi, 2005). Of course, cell phones are everywhere—
a whopping 1.5 billion and counting. They can be used for mobile training,
coaching, and performance support. Internet browser capabilities allow
employees to access web-based databases or search engines through their
cell phones. Short text messaging (SMS) can be used to send coaching tips,
quizzes and knowledge checks, or to measure training transfer. And video
clips can provide short examples of desirable performance in areas such as
negotiation, managing meetings, or customer service.
• Foster independent habits for learning and reference
Learners like choices (Reigeluth & Stein, 1983).With BL, employees can
progress at their own pace and even repeat parts of the program (Zenger &
Uehlein, 2001). They can participate in communities and relationships, and
enjoy interaction, guidance, and encouragement from peers, instructors,
supervisors, and coaches. For those who are reluctant to turn exclusively to
independent learning, blended forms anchored in the classroom can pave
the way.
“Three factors will change the face of traditional training and
development: increased global competition, outsourcing and smart suites.
The most visible of the three, smart suites, will integrate learning at the
desktop with an employee’s other tools such as e-mail, calendaring, IM,
and document management. In this environment informal learning is
pumped-up and the line between learning and doing fades.
—Margaret Driscoll, IBM Global Services (Neal, 2004)
• Converge learning and work
In the traditional instructor-led world, you are either IN class or AT work.
Not surprisingly then, instructors and managers worry about transfer. That
is less of a concern in a blended situation because BL brings learning,
information and support to where the work gets done (Rossett, 2005b). Got
a question? You can look it up online. Got a problem? You can chat with
your manager or share it with an online community. Eager to get better at
personnel management? Fortunately, there’s a course you can take and a
pre-assessment that will make certain you’re ready for that course. AMA’s
blended approach capitalizes on this benefit.
• Improve performance and control costs
Studies report increased cost-effectiveness (Graham, Allen, & Ure, 2003),
and increased productivity for those using a blended approach as opposed
to e-learning alone (Thomson/NETg, 2003). Other studies have reported
enhanced employee retention (Bersin, 2004; CLO, 2005a; Nelson, 2005), and
reduced training time for blended approaches (Zenger & Uehlein, 2001). In
addition, online resources can be easier and cheaper to update and
distribute (Osguthorpe & Graham, 2003).Singh (Singh, 2003) noted that less
expensive solutions, such as virtual collaboration, coaching, recorded live
events, and self-paced materials, can be used instead of more expensive
customized computer-based content.
If studies and opinions do not attract you to BL, consider that it just plain
makes sense. Who wouldn’t benefit from additional opportunities to
practice and reflect, targeted resources, engaged supervisors, interactions
with experts and peers, and advice and learning experienced right there,
within the workflow?
Training professionals surveyed in 2004 “predicted that knowledge
management tools, online simulations, wireless technologies, and reusable
content objects would impact the delivery of e-learning most greatly
during the next few years…[and that] authentic cases and scenario
learning, simulations or gaming, virtual team collaboration and problem
solving, and problem-based learning would be used more widely in the
coming decade.(Kim et al., 2005)
What goes into a blend?
A tour of assets
• The classroom
In a 2004 survey by the eLearning Guild (Pulichino, 2005), respondents
recognized classroom instruction as the most frequently used part of a
blend. According to some, it is still the best way to learn. AMA’s 2004
research made that point,“More than two-thirds of American organizations
agree with training experts that classroom training—with its opportunities
to interact with capable instructors and interested peers—is the best way for
adults to acquire the new skills and behaviors that they need to move their
careers, and their companies, forward. The classroom remains a critical
component of blended learning and is not going to disappear any time
• Coaching, e-coaching, e-mentoring
Coaches can be used to demonstrate, model, remind, critique, guide, nudge
and nag, in person or using technology. The key is finding knowledgeable,
credible coaches who are willing to do what needs to be done on an as
needed basis. Today most coaches rely on some form of electronic means to
communicate, if only to arrange appointments. But e-coaches go further,
typically using the internet strategically (Rossett & Marino, 2005). Relations
and skills can flourish online too, using Instant Messaging with voice and
video, for example, to coach a sales pitch, discuss approaches to a product
launch, or rework a job description.
• Blogs and Wikis
A blog, short for web log, is a website that contains a chronological
collection of journal-style entries on a given topic, constantly and easily
updated by an individual or group. Blogs typically allow readers to
comment by adding their own entries, rather than altering existing ones,
which can provide a rich array of perspectives and opinions. Unlike text-
only threaded discussion boards, blogs look good with their embedded
hyperlinks, images, and custom layouts. See an example of a blog at the HR
Blog, where managers can congregate to discuss human resources issues.
Plant managers at DaimlerChrysler U.S., for example, use blogs to discuss
and keep track of problems and their solutions, and IBM employees
worldwide use blogs to maintain a running tab of software development
projects and business strategies (McGregor, 2004).
A wiki (quickly, quickly, in the Hawaiian language) is a website where
several authors come together online to quickly generate and modify
content. is an example. One financial services company uses
a wiki to keep experts talking about a difficult topic and to then use their
collected thoughts to educate less experienced employees.
Blogs and wikis are designed to facilitate fast and inexpensive collaboration
and information sharing. Think of them as grassroots tools because they
put more power in employees’ hands. Blogs and wikis “… allow the user to
determine the relevancy of content rather than being dependent upon a
central distribution center or a linear distribution chain. After the initial
setup, users, not administrators, control a wiki, to the benefit of both”
(Goodnoe, 2005).
• Online communities
Online communities can expose participants to the skills, knowledge, and
culture of their profession. Though typically informal in nature, online
communities benefit from the care of an online moderator who can manage
the flow and pace of discussions, pose and answer technical questions, and
sustain group process. In a study of an online community of coordinators
for Alberta Community Adult Learning Councils, Gray (Gray, 2004) found
that participants “perceived the role of the moderator as ‘absolutely critical’
in starting up, supporting, and sustaining the informal online
• Performance support
Performance support puts the smarts at employees’ fingertips rather than
inside their heads (Rossett & Mohr, 2004). Support may include online help
systems and knowledge databases, decision tools, documentation, templates,
job aids, and so forth. In the U.S. Coast Guard, to complete safety
inspections aboard vessels, officers rely on their personal digital assistants
(PDA). The PDA walks them through a series of questions about the vessel
and customizes an inspection checklist.
We must look beyond the boundaries of traditional training, and beyond
the boundaries of the course. Certainly this will take us into performance
support and knowledge management, but we must go further, bleeding
e-learning into corporate communications, workplace learning,
marketing, recruitment, customer learning, searches on the web and the
real world. This expansive view of learning delivery offers lots of scope
for exciting new approaches to blended learning.
…. The learning organization is built not on the premise of more
training. In fact, in the case of formal training, less rather than more
may be required. It is built upon the need for learners to feel motivated
towards achieving goals through continuous learning. (Clark, 2003)
What types of blending make sense?
Blending is all about decisions. Managers must decide:
• Which assets to buy, build or adapt, and how they will be maintained;
• How and when to leverage the precious human resource provided by
experts and instructors;
• How much guidance and independence employees will enjoy;
• What kind of guidance system and support will be provided, if any at
all, and whether assistance comes from the instructor, an expert, the
manager, or an automated program.
Graham (2005) suggests that most blends today are collections of separate,
stand alone F2F and/or online components from which learners pick and
choose. Direction is minimal; freedom is maximized. Citicorp Latin
America successfully deployed such a blend with instructor-led workshops
and web-based modules for sales training. After the basic training class,
sales people may or may not elect to complete the modules. Likewise, some
who completed the modules may not have attended the F2F workshop.
In a more directed blend, components are presented within a defined
learning system. Integration might come from diagnostics that point
learners to specific lessons, resources, or assessments that culminate in a
certificate or other form of recognition. For example, students studying
project management at Defense Acquisition University can take self-
assessments that check their understanding of content from prerequisite
courses, and point them to topic areas in preparation for the next course.
Three blended models
Anchor Blend
An Anchor Blend starts with a defining and substantive classroom event,
followed by independent experiences that include interaction with online
resources, structured workplace learning activities, online learning and
reference, diagnostics, and assessments.
Schneider Electric, an international company with more than 85,000
employees worldwide, uses an anchor-blended approach for their
professional managers development program (PMDP) (Whitney, 2005).
Richardson and eCornell use an anchor blend for a sales and service
training program that launches with a highly interactive classroom event
followed by online modules for continuous reinforcement (CLO, 2005b).
Bookend Blend
The Bookend Blend is characterized by a three-part experience: something
introductory, an essential, substantive and meaty learning experience,
online or F2F, and then something that concludes and extends the learning
into practice at work.
As shown in Figure 1, AMAs three-part approach to blended learning
combines “before-the-seminar” elements such as web-based pre-
assessments and a customized “seminar learning plan,” then substantive F2F
seminar experiences, concluding with “after-the-seminar” post-assessments.
If post-assessments reveal skill gaps, participants are encouraged to
participate in small “tune up courses, additional readings and other related
materials (Leonard, 2005).
Figure 1. The AMA Blended Learning Experience
Mail Boxes Etc., now UPS, relied on substantive classroom experiences, with
on-the-job training as their bookends. The four-week blended program for
new franchisees started with one week of training on-the-job combined
with online courses. After that grounding in the field, employees attended
two weeks of classroom training at a regional training site. Finally, they
returned to their stores for more on-the-job training supported by online
Field Blend
The Field Blend is most distinct from training-as-usual. It is employee-
centric, with each individual surrounded by many kinds of assets and
continuous choices about when and where and whether to reach for them.
Although a classroom experience is often part of the Field mix, it is but one
method of many, with the focus on independent and persistent choices and
continuous learning and reference at work. The Field Blend requires
employees to commit to continuing growth and effort, relying on defined
expectations, engaged managers, and assessments that point to resources.
Key to the effort, of course, is provision of a treasure trove of resources and
some way to find what’s there and what’s right for you or your people.
For example, for engineers at Shell EP, blending relies on authentic
workplace problems as grist for learning. As they work through these real-
life problems, employees share their experiences, work product, and
reflections by contributing to an online repository. Engineers might
compare their situation to a colleague’s, or look for trends in the field and
relate those to the course materials. Their contributions become content
objects which can be reused for follow-up activities (Margaryan, Collis, &
Cooke, 2004).
A global technology company uses a blended approach for management
development. Once individuals become managers, they are paired with
other new managers and provided with ongoing access to learning,
communications, assessment, feedback, and information. Participants
receive basic management content through self-paced online modules, they
learn through interactive scenarios, and they use an online workspace to
collaborate with peers and experienced e-mentors. The learning
management system provides tracking and periodic assessment so that
dedicated tutors can follow and coach participants’ progress. The classroom
remains a part of the blend, with managers and their mentors meeting F2F
to advance lessons learned online.
Comparing three BL models
• Familiarity
The Anchor Blend will feel most familiar because it starts in the classroom.
In the classroom, an instructor leads the group through structured
experiences and introduces other more independent options, online and
otherwise. The classroom moments are essential because employees are
taught content and how the blended system works. New roles and
expectations are introduced. Relationships are nurtured and a taste is
developed for the continuing engagement and independent efforts to follow.
• Authenticity
The Field Blend will feel the most authentic because learning is there,
within the flow of work and life. When time allows or because a pressing
need has emerged, the employee seeks out a supervisor, experiences an e-
learning module, or consults an e-coach, online knowledge base, print
documentation, or FAQ.
• Independence
While all blends require independent choices about engagement by
employees, the Field Blend is predicated on it. It delivers a buffet of
resources and relies upon nutritious habits by employees over time, as they
work. In contrast, employees typically experience the Bookend and Anchor
Blends as a group. While some independent action is required, a group of
employees typically follows similar and defined learning paths.
• Simplicity
Nothing, of course, is as simple as scheduling a class, hiring an instructor,
and filling the seats. And that’s not all that simple. Still, in comparison with
each other and from the perspective of participants and managers, the
Bookend Blend is most simple of all. Purposely constrained in the number
of assets, and forthright in defining what to do and in what order, the
Bookend Blend comforts by stating, limiting, and directing choices. This
makes good sense for novice or reluctant participants. The benefits of
extension into the workplace and a continued conversation are there; the
degrees of freedom have been bounded, but not so much as to lose the
benefits of practice and learning set in the real world. AMA’s Bookend
Blend, for example, assures and guides learners through defined elements
before and after F2F experiences.
How do I craft a blend?
Table 2. Consider the audience
• Rely on the Anchor or Bookend Blends to guide
involvement,capitalize on instructors’ talents and
expertise, and reduce and define options. Consider
live e-learning events and e-coaching. Informal and
low cost approaches are useful, such as supervisor
coaching, lunch chats, listservs, email, documen-
tation, databases, e-coaching, and resource links.
• Technology will help meet the needs of dispersed
employees. For large numbers, and where content
is stable, consider development and maintenance
of media-rich assets such as online modules,
high-quality video and audio, scenarios,
simulations, and online help systems.
Asynchronous and synchronous events, e-
coaches, online communities and listservs with
involved experts will also work here. Ensure
guidance systems that allow users to search and
find what they need.
• If they doubt themselves or the topic, rely on
human guidance and interactions to coach and
motivate. Ensure that participants experience
success through an active instructor, live e-
learning, and supervisory coaching. Anchor and
Bookend Blends are suitable. The Field model is
less so.
• No surprise here. They are accustomed to it. The
Bookend Blend holds promise for employees
keen on the classroom. The Anchor Blend also
makes sense here. Use classroom events to
demonstrate how technology can deliver answers
as needed and nurture interpersonal connections
through synchronous events, e-coaching,
resource links, and online communities.
The total audience
is large and far-
Employees are
hesitant or
Employees like the
The total audience
is small (<250)
• The Field Blend allows for many tastes and
preferences. The challenge is to provide a
guidance and search system, rich and updated
resources, and ways for individuals to combine
their experiences in ways that are rewarded and
• Different content requires different amounts of
maintenance. For volatile content, develop assets
that are easier and cheaper to build and
maintain, such as online resource links,
databases, listservs, email notifications, live e-
learning, online documentation, and live
coaching and mentoring in class or via personal
• If employees must know it by heart, any of the
three models will work. What’s critical is to invest
in extensive practice and feedback over time. Use
online tutorials, workbooks, simulations,
coaching, e-coaching, and classroom practice
sessions. Measure achievement. Track effort and
progress. Provide feedback. Consider
• If there is little time for employees to attend
training, provide them with what they need at
work, in the workflow, and linked to pressing
questions and tasks. Rely on resources that aren't
time-dependent, such as self-paced learning
modules, examples, readings, and asynchronous
“Self-training (e.g., e-learning) faces four major challenges: The ability
to get employees motivated on their own; No access to continuous
personalized support; No other learning tools besides the course materials
employees and managers use; No extensive hands-on practice so new
skills can be immediately applied on the job.(AMA, 2004)
Employees must
that they know
their stuff
Our people need
to be at work,
not in class
Employees are
diverse and so are
their interests and
The content
changes often
Table 3. Consider results and reality
discussions. Provide short targeted lessons and knowledge resources that are
linked to their challenges and tasks. Whenever possible, minimize training
and insinuate performance support and job aids into the work. If employees
are committed and eager, the Field Blend should work. If they are less keen
or confident, get supervisors, managers and instructors involved to
encourage employees to habitually feast from accessible resources targeted
to questions.
How does BL affect what people do?
Blended learning redefines what everybody does.
Blended learning shifts responsibility for learning from the instructor to the
employee. For many, this is not an easy transition. They like what they know
– classroom experiences led by instructors – and are often uncomfortable
and not particularly adept at learning more independently and online. An
important finding in the education literature is that many students given
"When you have senior management doing the teaching, they have so
much credibility with the workforce. Because they take the time to teach,
it shows true sponsorship and true engagement, and I think then
employees learn even more. It gets back to the manager being the most
important person in an employee’s life," says Rita Danker, vice president
of organizational development and human resources at Schneider
Electric. (Whitney, 2005)
control over their own learning choose to terminate the experience before
mastering the training task,(Brown, 2001).
Provide useful, clear guidance systems that link to work and career paths.
Help employees consider their readiness to learn continuously and
independently. Think about your employees. Are they ready? What might
get in the way? Quicklist 1 can help reflect on their readiness.
Blended learning, because it often occurs in the workplace, depends on an
active supervisor or manager. When BL is in place, managers and
supervisors must coach, guide, track, motivate, and encourage. They can
influence F2F or online, formally and informally, synchronously and
asynchronously. Quicklist 2 raises questions for managers.
To support the development of new real estate agents at Century 21,
managers are given a coaching guide to answer questions, contextualize the
content, and provide on-the-job learning opportunities as new agents
participate in online and F2F training. General Electric and Intel define
employee development as a part of the manager’s job.
Shell EP used a ‘learning agreement’ between the learner and manager that
detailed expected performance improvement to result from the course.
While learners were pleased with the learning agreements/contracts they
developed with their managers, managers were less enthusiastic. The
researchers concluded that “It is necessary to identify additional tools and
strategies to involve the line managers, to extend their role from
“approving”the participation in the course to being a full partner in the
learning process,(Margaryan et al., 2004).
In a BL system, teaching is important, but not sufficient; instructors do
more than teach. Through online systems, they might monitor and nudge
employees’ progress, moderate a discussion board, coach managers, enliven
online communities, offer feedback on a group or individual task, analyze
workplace readiness, and post answers to frequently asked questions.
In Avaya’s blended learning courses, instructors act as experts and
consultants, helping students analyze and solve problems. They work with
students in the classroom to develop diagnostic and trouble-shooting skills,
and they provide online support by monitoring student progress. At the
Defense Acquisition University, instructors are growing into coaches and
performance consultants. They tailor services to needs and are measured, in
part, by the satisfaction of the people they serve in these new ways.
One of the nifty things about blends is that content experts can be involved
in small yet targeted ways, in person or via technology. They may be used to
enhance a specific lesson, or called upon as a “go to” person in the field with
questions, guidance, and resources. Wyndham International, Inc. uses a
system that works much like the online dating service,
Wyndham’s system connects hotel employees to experienced people who
can answer questions.
The executive’s role is to provide an organizational environment that is
collaborative and cross-functional. Here is where learning professionals and
business leaders foster a learning culture that extends beyond classrooms
and into the workplace.
Before embarking on BL, executives should examine where they stand.
Quicklist 3 will help.
In a 2004 survey of training professionals, “in terms of skills required by
online trainers/instructors, a majority of the respondents predicted that
by 2010, online facilitating or moderating would be the most vital skill for
online trainers/instructors, followed by online mentoring, lecturing, and
evaluating or assessing skills.(Kim, Bonk, & Zeng, 2005)
How do we look at the effectiveness of blends?
In a recent survey by the eLearning Guild, respondents projected an
increase in measurement of e-learning based on business impact (Pulichino,
2005). Good intentions aside, according to the ASTD 2004 State of the
Industry report, evaluation that targets field results is far from universal.
What we attempt to do here is to provide a brief overview of the
possibilities for measuring BL.
Approaching measurement: Then and now
One approach to measurement, Kirkpatrick’s four levels of evaluation
(Kirkpatrick, 1998), has enjoyed decades of popularity (ASTD, 2003;
(Pulichino, 2005)). Kirkpatrick’s model is based on four levels, commencing
with the most familiar concerns and concluding with the most strategic: (1)
Did they like it? Were employees satisfied with the experience? (2) Did they
get it? Did employees learn? Can they do it? (3) Do they do it at work? Did
training transfer into performance back on the job? (4) So what? Does
performance translate into results that matter?
Recently, Phillips (Phillips, 2003) added a fifth level to the model that asks,
(5) Was it worth it? Do results justify the investment?
Rossett (Rossett, 2005a) suggested a shift away from five-level evaluation
that is predicated on being IN training or AT work, to assessment that is
ongoing and merged with practice, as is the case with blended learning.
Integrated evaluation, thus, asks questions about satisfaction, engagement,
influence, practice, and value and it asks these questions continuously.
Measurement of BL is:
Continuous and meaningful. In the good old days, evaluation happened
after class, typically by administering a survey that queries participants
about satisfaction. With a blend, such questions happen often, for
example, after an executive has completed 20 minutes with her coach or
15 minutes looking at recent research on a key topic. Was that useful?
Would you recommend the experience to others? What other questions
linger? How can we be more useful to you?
Transparent, diverse,and technology-based. The use of technology for
data collection provides training managers, line managers, executives,
and employees themselves with continuous and ready access to data.
Do I know how to answer that question? Did I demonstrate it? How am
I doing with this material? Data can be collected using surveys, interviews,
focus groups, observations done with performance checklists, review of
work products, self-assessments, multiple choice or essay tests,
simulations, bench work, automated tracking of progress or usage, and
so on and so forth. Technology can play a part, through web-based forms,
emails, short text messaging to wireless devices or cell phones, or online
assessment with customized feedback built into learning modules and
simulations. The technology systems help leaders know what their
employees want to know, how they are faring, how much they are
participating, the resources they are tapping, and how to be more
helpful throughout the process.
What gets measured?
What indicators will you use to look inside BL programs? Here are some
Enrollment and Completion. What are the enrollment rates? Did
employees complete a particular module, course, or series of courses? Did
they take assessments and self-assessments? Enrollment and completion
are germane where compliance and certification are concerned, but are
less relevant in BL, because the learning and relationships are often
ongoing and even informal. No matter the case, rely on assessments that
ask participants to measure up against work-relevant performance
Participation. Because blending shifts control and decisions to
employees, their choices reveal much about the health and success of the
program and assets. Which assets are chosen? Which ignored? How are
various assets and activities being accessed and used? What do typical
learning paths look like? How much do employees rely on the knowledge
base to find answers? How often did they review portions of an online
module, take the self-assessment, download a template, or examine a
video example? How much time did they spend engaged in online
communities or in conversations with their supervisors or an expert?
Reaction. Are they pleased about the time spent on the blend? Which
assets do they favor? Which do they ignore? While few will expect the
blend to be a rollicking good time, employees must see good reasons to
take an online class, chat with a coach, look at a database, self-assess, or
check in with an online community.Are employees satisfied with the
program and assets? What about coaches, experts, or supervisors? Do they
enjoy their roles? Will employees continue to come back for more? Would
they recommend it to their colleagues?
Learning. Did employees earn a passing score for an entire course or
sections of it? Can they demonstrate attainment of skills, retention,
proficiency, and mastery through some type of authentic assessment?
Does the learning and assessment combine to earn participants some
form of recognition or certification?
Performance. Are they handling work challenges differently? Better? Do
outcomes reflect new skills and knowledge? Are they using what is taught
in the blend? Do customers perceive a difference?
Business impact. Why did the sponsors commit to the program? What
indicators of success will they accept? Establish these answers and then
seek relevant data throughout the effort.
Value. Was it worth it for the organization? Was it worth it for the
employee? Do the benefits realized from the program justify the costs in
terms of money and time spent on development, implementation, and
maintenance? Would the sponsor do it all over again?
An example of how evaluation might work
Let’s look at how we might approach measurement of a blend devoted to
developing customer service specialists at a financial services company.
Adriana, a retirement specialist, is glued to her desk, taking customer phone
calls and using her computer to access customer records and blended assets.
She and her colleagues are motivated to continuously develop their skills
because tax laws and the company’s portfolio of services are constantly
changing, and also because they earn more as they acquire appropriate
certifications. Their supervisors are supportive of the program and are
themselves certified. For this situation, the Field Blend offers choices,
freedom and practicality. Below is a description of how Adriana might
experience the blend, and why these particular indicators were chosen.
BL: bridging the classroom and workplace
Years ago, after teaching a seminar in a room in a hotel, one of the authors
heard these words,“That was a great class, but…” The participant then
offered a litany of concerns, starting with her manager and proceeding to
lack of time, lack of fit with her job description, and the certainty that if she
did this, it wouldn’t elevate the measures on her performance review.
Blended learning, predicated on an active manager, engaged peers, targeted
guidance system, and rich learning and information assets, begins to tackle
some of the “buts” by accompanying her at work.
But it is just the beginning for BL.
It is important to admit that as good an idea as blended learning is, in most
settings today, it is more potential than actual. BL is a glimmer in the eyes of
people eager to transcend the limitations of classroom instruction and training
schedules – too often experiences that are set in time and bounded by place.
What we enjoy now is a blended learning opportunity. Each organization
has that opportunity, like the organizations described in this paper, to
leverage internal experts and installed technology, to reiterate classroom
messages, and to systematically stir treasured assets into the workplace and
workforce. Ask your executives. Ask yourself. If it was possible, wouldn’t
organizations be strengthened by more pervasive learning experiences,
knowledge, support and conversations in closer proximity to where the
work gets done, where customers are served, and where problems are
Perhaps most intriguing of all is the influence on employees themselves.
Blended learning asks much of them, while it establishes and applauds skills
and habits that favor continuous growth, collaboration, curiosity and
reference. What thoughtful manager wouldn’t be keen on that?
THE PERFECT STORM: The Future of Retention and Engagement
Quicklist 4: I want to learn more about blended learning.
I have a few
AMA. (2004). Training for Today's Business Needs.
Bersin, J. (2004). Blended Learning: Finding What Works. Chief Learning Officer.
Brennan, M. (January 2004). Blended Learning and Business Change. Chief Learning
Rossett, A., Douglis, F., & Frazee, R. V. (2003). Strategies for Building Blended
Learning, Learning Circu its.
I have a day or
Check out ASTD, eLearning Gu ild, and Chief Learning Officer for research, ar ticles, and
Peruse articles on blended learning at the e-Learning Centre.
Read articles and research rel ated to busin ess, learnin g, and results at IDC.
Examine examples at Rossett, A., & Frazee, R. V. (2003). E-learning Portfolio.
I am ready to
make a big
Bielawski, L., & Metcalf, D. (2003). Blended eLearning: Integrating Knowledge,
Performance Support, and Online Learning. HRD Press .
Bersin, J. (2004). The Blended Learning Book: Best Practices, Proven Methodologies, and
Lessons Learned. Pfeiffer.
Bonk, C. J., & Graham, C. R. (Eds.). (2005). The Handbook of Blended Learning: Global
Perspective s, Local Design s. Pfeiffer.
Driscoll, M ., & Carliner, S . (2005). Advanced Web-Based Training Strategies: Unlocking
Instructionally Sound Online Learning. John Wiley & Sons.
Goldsmith, M., Morgan, H., & Ogg, A.J. (2004). Leading Organizational Learning:
Harnessing the Power of Knowledge. Jossey-Bass.
Lev, B. (2001). Intangibles: Management, Measurement, and Reporting. Washington,
D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
Masie, E. (Ed.). (2005). Learning Rants, Raves, and Reflections. Pfeiffer.
Piskurich, G. (Ed.). (2003). The AMA Handbook of E-Learning: Effective Design,
Implementation, and Technology Solutions. NY: AMACOM.
Rossett A. (Ed.) (2002). The ASTD e-learning Handbook: Best Practices, Strategies, and
Case Studies for an Emerging Field. NY: McGraw-H ill.
Rossett, A., & Sheldon, K. (2001). Beyond the Podium: Delivering Training and
Performance to a Digital World. Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.
Rothwell, W.J., Lindholm, J., & Wallick, W.G. (2003). What CEOs Expect From
Corporate Training: Building Workplace Learning and Performance Initiatives That
Advance Organizational Goals. NY: AMACOM.
Schank, R. (2005). Lessons in Learning, e-Learning, and Training: Perspectives and
Guidance for the Enlightened Trainer. Pfeiffer.
Tobin, D. R. (1997). The Knowledge-Enabled organization: Moving from "Training" to
"Learning" to Meet Business Goals. New York, NY: AMACOM.
Dr.Allison Rossett, long time Professor of Educational Technology at
San Diego State University, is in the Training magazine HRD Hall of Fame
and is a member of the ASTD International Board of Directors. Recipient
of ASTD’s 2002 award for her contributions to workplace learning and
performance, Rossett edited The ASTD E-Learning Handbook: Best Practices,
Strategies, and Case Studies for an Emerging Field. Rossett also wrote Beyond
the Podium: Delivering Training and Performance to a Digital World and
First Things Fast: A Handbook for Performance Analysis. Prior award-
winning books are Training Needs Assessment, and A Handbook of Job Aids,
currently undergoing revision. Some of Allison recent articles are “Moving
Your Class Online,”“Confessions of a Web Dropout,”and “Training and
Organizational Development, Siblings Separated at Birth.” She has
published articles on persistence in online learning, needs analysis, and
performance support. Rossett's client list includes Microsoft, IBM, HP,
the Getty Conservation Institute, Fidelity Investments, Deloitte Consulting,
BP, the IRS, TSA, Amgen, Royal Bank of Scotland, and several elearning
start-ups. Dr. Rossett can be reached at
Rebecca Vaughan Frazee, has been working as an instructional designer
and performance consultant for nearly a decade. She has managed several
large-scale projects and designed f2f and technology-based solutions for
national, global and Fortune 50 companies. Her work centers on the
development of training and education professionals, helping them expand
their focus beyond training to more systemic performance solutions,
and supporting them in the move to performance consulting, e-learning
and blended learning. She has taught graduate courses in educational
technology and conducted workshops and presentations on project
management, data analysis, needs assessment and performance
improvement. Her recent publications include “Technology adoption:
Bringing along the late-comers” in the ASTD E-Learning Handbook,
“Using Relevance to Facilitate Online Participation in a Hybrid Course” in
EDUCAUSE Quarterly, and “Begin with the end (user) in mind: Planning
for the San Diego State University campus portal” in Designing Portals:
Opportunities and Challenges. Rebecca’s client list includes Motorola,
Fidelity Investments, PricewaterhouseCoopers, Prudential Securities,
Eli Lilly, TEC International, NASSCO, the Corporation for National
Service, San Jose State University, and the IRS. She can be reached at
AMA. (2004).Training for Today's Business Needs. Retrieved August 20, 2005, from
Bersin, J. (2004). Blended Learning: Finding What Works. Retrieved February 26, 2004, from the Chief
Learning Officer website at
Brown, K. G. (2001). Using computers to deliver training:Which employees learn and why? Personnel
Psychology, 54(2), 271-296.
Clark, D. (2003). Blended Learning (White Paper). Retrieved August 20, 2005, from
CLO. (2005a). Industry News: Domino's Pizza Aims to Improve Retention with E-Learning. Retrieved
August 1, 2005, from
CLO. (2005b). Industry News: eCornell Selects Richardson for Blended Training. Retrieved August 1,
2005, from
eTForecasts. (2005). PCs In-Use Surpassed 820M in 2004: PCs In-Use Will Top 1B in 2007. Retrieved
August 20, 2005, from
Goodnoe, E. (2005, August 8). How To Use Wikis For Business, from
Graham, C. R. (2005). Blended Learning Systems: Definition, Current Trends, and Future Directions;.
In C. Bonk & C. R. Graham (Eds.), Handbook of blended learning: Global Perspectives, local designs.
Graham, C. R.,Allen, S., & Ure,D. (2003). Blended learning environments: A review of the research
literature. Unpublished manuscript, Provo, UT.
Gray, B. (2004). Informal Learning in an Online Community of Practice. Journal Of Distance Education,
19(1), 20-35.
Kim, K.-J., Bonk, C. J., & Zeng,T. (2005). Surveying the future of workplace e-learning: the rise of
blending, interactivity, and authentic learning, from
Kirkpatrick, D. (1998). Evaluating training programs:The four levels (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA:
Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Leonard, P. (2005). Blended learning provides efficient, effective, measureable learning. Retrieved
August 1, 2005, from
Margaryan, A., Collis, B., & Cooke, A. (2004). Activity-based blended learning. Human Resource
Development International, 7(2), 265-274.
McGregor,J. (2004). It's a Blog World After All. Retrieved 81, from Fast Company at
Modi, N. (2005). The Majority Of Global Internet Users Using A High-Speed Connection. Retrieved
August 20, 2005, from
Neal, L. (2004). Predictions for 2004, from E-Learn Magazine at
Nelson, A. (2005). Deploying Media-rich Learning Systems. CLO Magazine, 4(5), 45-47.
Osguthorpe, R.T., & Graham, C. R. (2003). Blended learning systems: Definitions and
directions. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 4(3), 227-234.
Phillips, J. (2003). Return on Investment in Training and Performance Improvement.
Boston, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Pulichino, J. (2005).The eLearning Guild: Metrics and Measurement 2005 Research Report.
Reigeluth, C. M., & Stein, E. S. (1983). The elaboration theory of instruction. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.),
Instructional design theories and models: An overview of their current status (pp. 335-381).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Rossett, A. (2005a). Are We Asking the Right Questions? Paper presented at The eLearning Guild
Instructional Design Conference, Boston, Mass.
Rossett, A. (2005b). Never Worry about Transfer Again—Seven Strategies for Converging Learning and
Work. Paper presented at the International Society for Performance Improvement Annual Conference,
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Rossett, A., Douglis, F., & Frazee, R. V. (2003, July). Strategies for building blended learning, Learning
Circuits. Retrieved August 1, 2004, from
Rossett, A., & Marino, G. (2005). If coaching is good, then e-coaching is... T+D, 59(11).
Rossett, A., & Mohr, E. (2004). Performance support tools: where learning, work, and results converge:
Einstein was an early performance support tool user. The U.S. Coast Guard uses PSTs. Time to get on
board? T&D, 58(2).
Rossett, A., & Schafer, L. (June 2003). What to do about e-dropouts: What if it's not the e-learning but
the e-learner? T+D, 57(6), 40-46.
Singh, H. (2003). Building Effective Blended Learning Programs. Educational Technology
& Learning, 43, 51-54.
Sparrow, S. (2004). Blended is Better. By: Sparrow, Stephanie. T+D, Nov 2004,Vol. 58 Issue 11, p 52, 4p;.
Sullivan, J. (2005, July).World-Class Talent Development: How Learning Organizations Align Talent
Development with Organizational Objectives, from
Thomson/NETg. (2003).Thomson Job Impact Study. Retrieved February 17, 2003, from
Whitney, K. (2005, August). Schneider Electric: Lighting Up the Performance Improvement Process.
Workforce Performance Solutions, 1(3), 34-35, 56.
Zenger,J., & Uehlein, C. (2001). Why blended will win. T + D, 55(8), 54-60.
About American Management Association
American Management Association is the world’s leading membership-based
management development organization. Since 1923, it has provided valuable
and practical action-oriented learning programs to business professionals at every
stage of their careers. Each year, more than 500,000 AMA customers and members
learn new skills and behaviors, gain more confidence, advance their careers, and
contribute to the success of their organizations through a wide range of AMA
seminars, conferences, and executive forums, as well as through AMA books
and publications, research, online learning and self-study courses. For more
information, visit
... Indeed, one of the affordances provided by digital technologies is the expansion and continuity of space-time in the learning environment [15]. According to Rossett and Frazee [20], BL occurs in formal (e.g., classroom), non-formal (e.g., work, communities of practice) and informal learning environments (e.g., media, websites), building on the strengths of each context. Moreover, Rossett and Frazee [20] highlight the facilitating roles of both humans (e.g., tutors) and digital technologies in education. ...
... According to Rossett and Frazee [20], BL occurs in formal (e.g., classroom), non-formal (e.g., work, communities of practice) and informal learning environments (e.g., media, websites), building on the strengths of each context. Moreover, Rossett and Frazee [20] highlight the facilitating roles of both humans (e.g., tutors) and digital technologies in education. ...
Full-text available
Blended learning usually refers to the combination of online/offline instructional methods. In this paper, we describe a university course in “E-learning Psychology” designed to blend not only modes of teaching, tools, and media, but also learning contexts; specifically, academic and professional contexts. To achieve an effective blend of learning contexts, students were monitored by academic and company tutors through an instant messaging app (WhatsApp). The unique contribution of the company tutor to the blending of academic and professional contexts is explored. By qualitatively analyzing (i) process data (four WhatsApp log chats) and (ii) self-report data (interviews with six company tutors), we found that the company tutor contributed to both the traditional blended dimension (mixing online and offline) and to the blend of the academic and professional contexts. When company tutors participated in the chat, students moved from an organizational dynamic, featuring chats monitored by only the academic tutor, toward a more collaborative and reflective dynamic. The company tutors considered the opportunity to blend academic and professional contexts as the best aspect of the course for both themselves as educators/company representatives, and for the students. This paper offers insights into the ongoing discussion about what blended is—or should be—and the role of company tutors in blending educational contexts.
... For these purposes, online and face-to-face activities are used. The model proposed by Rossett and Frazee (2006), on the other hand, is mainly focused on the programs that offer training for competence. This model includes classroom activities enriched with workplace experience and online learning. ...
This research aims to analyze the past literature on blended learning in higher education and investigate the research trends on this subject. Thus, it aims to present a roadmap for future studies. In this context, bibliometric and descriptive analysis methods were used in the study carried out with the descriptive survey model. 1970 studies were accessed using the Web of Science (WoS) database to reach the data within the scope of the research. As a result of the filtering process on the database, the distribution of the relevant publications by year, document type, publication language, country and WoS indexes, the most influential institutions and research, cooperation between institutions and countries, the most cited authors, and the most studied topics were reviewed. According to the research results, the studies on blended learning in higher education were primarily published in the form of articles in English between the years 2002-2021. It is also deduced that Spain stands out, especially in producing publications, and these studies are generally published in the Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Social Science & Humanities (CPCI-SSH) index type. The most active journal with high citation density is Computers & Education, and the country that collaborates most is England. Regarding the keywords used in the articles, while the concepts of online learning, higher education, and student participation are prominent in the studies conducted in the first years, the concepts such as flipped classrooms, Edmodo, sustainability, gamification, mobile learning, and emotions came to the fore in the following years. In this context, discussions were conducted within the framework of the literature, and suggestions were made related to the findings obtained.
... Cross and Moore [53] визначає BL як "крокування (трамплiн) у майбутнє", а Rossett and Frazee [110] зазначають, що BL "iнтегрує, здавалося б, протилежнi пiдходи, такi як формальне i неформальне навчання, очне та онлайн навчання, самоспрямоване i кероване навчання, а також цифровi довiдковi матерiали i особистi контакти для досягнення iндивiдуальних та iнституцiйних цiлей [навчання]". У працi Graham [70] визначено три найпоширенiших визначення BL: "комбiнування форм навчання (або засобiв навчання), комбiнування методiв навчання та комбiнування очного та онлайн навчання". ...
Full-text available
This article discusses blended learning (BL) as an optimal way to organize the educational process during crises, such as a pandemic or war. The article aims to answer two research questions: 1) What is the appropriate Ukrainian scientific term for "blended learning" given the country's European integration processes? 2) What is the meaning of the term "blended learning"? The analysis leads to the conclusion that the appropriate Ukrainian scientific term for "blended learning" is "kombinovane navchannia". The article defines blended learning as a planned, pedagogically balanced, adaptive combination, integration, and interpenetration of technologies (face-to-face and distance learning, formal and informal learning, real and virtual, individual and collective learning) with the aim of optimally satisfying the educational needs of participants in the educational process through the use of intelligent technologies.
... Проаналізувавши дослідження зарубіжних вчених [6,7], виділяємо основні компоненти моделі змішаного навчання: ...
The article deals with the peculiarities of blended learning implementation in teaching foreign languages for professional purposes at the institutions of higher education. The author examines the essence of blended learning model, which combines traditional form of study (face-to-face session) with online collaborative learning and all characteristics of information educational technologies, analyzes its main principles and priorities, as well as the difficulties of its introduction in the educational process of the university. In particular, the possibility of using blended learning as a means of improving the effectiveness of the educational process is considered. The article substantiates the methodical expediency of blended learning application in the process of teaching foreign languages for professional purposes at higher educational institutions at non-philological specialties. Recently, the higher educational institutions intensify the process of learning foreign languages through the introduction of the variety of teaching technologies. Blended learning is a combination of the traditional classroom and modern digital education. Blended learning can be an important direction in the modernization of higher education and a prerequisite for improving quality and efficiency of the learning process. The main advantages of blended learning are productivity, teamwork, individualization, asynchrony, speed, interactivity, didactic support, the presence of control systems, self-control, evaluation.
... У свою чергу, викладач, часто як автор курсу, має можливість диференціювати матеріал (або окремі завдання) згідно з рівнем групи та визначеною навчальною метою, урізноманітнюючи та взаємодоповнюючи процес навчання різними видами академічної діяльності. Відтак технологія змішаного навчання не обмежується лише поєднанням очної та онлайн форм, вона передбачає залучення різноманітности навчальних технік і підходів, використання електронних курсів і книг, дидактичних ігор, мобільних додатків, соціальних мереж, хмарних технологій, організацію практичного навчання, проектної роботи, коучингу, виїзного навчання тощо (Rosset & Frazee, 2006). Підсумовуючи, зазначимо, що різноманіття ресурсів онлайн складової навчального процесу значно його збагачує, сприяючи формуванню високого рівня мотивації та самосвідомості. ...
... In addition, the workplace personnel can choose and manage their learning at their own convenience and are able to repeat their learning in different parts of the program [43]. From the workplace context, it was found that BL in the workplace consisted of three components: classroom learning, online learning, and activities [44,45]. Therefore, the developing training model to be applied in the orgnization would consider combining all these three parts as a proper portion to define the most efficient training model for personnel in the workplace. ...
Full-text available
Problem-solving skill is one of the soft skills that has become essential for employees in various organizations. Training model and educational technology were considered key success factors in delivering knowledge for personnel in the workplace to develop this skill. Problem-Based Learning (PBL) is a key driver for learning activities, which has been increasingly adopted for workplace training and has proven to be one of the best approaches to helping learners improve their problem-solving skills in the organization. Hence, this research aims to synthesize problem-based blended training via chatbot to enhance problem-solving skills in the workplace. Literature review, document analysis, and focus group technique were used as the main procedures for the first phase of model synthesis. The effectiveness of the training model was examined in the second phase by applying it to 20 employees of the flexible lamination manufacturers in Thailand from purposive sampling. The training was held for four weeks and examined with a problem-solving skill test. In addition, a follow-up test has been conducted to monitor retention skills after a four-week training period. Data analysis used the repeated-measures ANOVA test with normality and homogeneity as a prerequisite test. This study shows that the problem-based blended training model via chatbot to enhance problem-solving skills in the workplace comprises six main steps: (1) Group identification; (2) Problem identification; (3) Idea creation; (4) Learning; (5) Implementation; (6) Evaluation. The results on the implemented training model showed that problem-solving skills after training were significantly higher than those before training, and the retention of skill remained higher than that before training and did not significantly change after finishing training at a statistical significance of 0.5. As a result, the developed model is highly appropriate for implementation, particularly because the chatbot platform is involved in almost every step of this training model to accommodate learners who can easily access the training platform, repeat the training content, and feel motivated to explore new information to improve their problem-solving skills. In a post-COVID-19 period with distancing required in the workplace, this model is applicable to deliver efficiency in workplace training. Doi: 10.28991/ESJ-2022-SIED-01 Full Text: PDF
... Rosette and Farzi found that integrated education provides multiple opportunities for communication, collaboration, interaction, and learning control. According to [36] Savari and Fallahi, integrated education makes it possible to simulate highly complex practical activities in a computer environment to teach the subject to learners at a lower cost, time, and risk. Valitan used integrated education to describe learning activities based on a variety of events, such as face-to-face learning, live e-learning, and self-centered learning [37]. ...
... • The process could include peer-to-peer interaction using blended learning. According to Rossett and Frazee (2006), the instructor will cease to be the central focus and the primary disseminator of information but respond to questions while the learners defer directly to the instructor for guidance and feedback. Instead of individual lessons focused on an explanation of the traditional "supply and demand" theories. ...
Full-text available
The exponential growth of technology and artificial intelligence means that the world is rapidly changing. Education is not exempt from this trend. New ways of engaging and teaching are needed. This need has been exacerbated by the arrival of COVID‐19, which is stimulating higher education to reevaluate its approach to teaching and learning. This is a conceptual paper that looks at several theories and philosophies that underpin all forms of “learning” especially those theories coming from the systems paradigm which the authors consider is essential for future higher educators. Based on these theories, a new approach to higher education is proposed and an example given of how it could work in practice. The article provides a platform for further discussion and debate to support the strategic vision and direction of travel for higher education.
Purpose – This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of blended learning during the Covid-19 pandemic on students’ learning achievements at SMP Muhammadiyah 1 Prambanan. Design/methods/approach – This research was conducted by means of a descriptive qualitative method. The data were collected through observation, interviews and documentation. The collected data were analyzed by reducing data, presenting data, and drawing conclusions. Findings – This study revealed that blended learning had not been able to achieve the desired learning objectives, since it had not been able to reflect the value of Islamic education as seen from students’ lack of manners, particularly to teachers. This fact is attributed to several factors: 1) Teachers’ lack of monitoring on students’ development and associations during the pandemic 2) lack of motivation to learn, 3) lack of adequate facilities for online learning. To overcome the aforementioned problems, teachers have done the followings based on several aspects: 1) the cognitive aspect, the teachers were proactive by helping students who had learning difficulties during the online learning. 2) affective aspects, teacher set an example to students, trained them to practice regular worship, sharpen their ability to behave honestly, and monitored the development of their attitudes and behaviors through their parents. 3) psychomotor aspect, teachers reopened several extracurricular activities. Research limitations – The limitations of this research are mainly centered on the limited number of samples observed as case studies at SMP Muhammadiyah 1 Prambanan. Originality/value – The research findings provide an explanation on the effectiveness of blended learning during the Covid-19 pandemic and teachers’ efforts in achieving learning outcomes.
Full-text available
This study examined factors that contribute to Web based learning success in Distance Education using eLearning platforms from students and faculty perceptions. The study examined student's self-efficacy, online self-efficacy, motivation, prior knowledge and course expectations (Kölmel &Würtz, 2015). Eight well-known factors that comprise of student support, social presence, direct instruction, learning platform, faculty interaction, student interaction, learning content, and course design and three outcome factors that include what students receive from their Web based learning experience like student satisfaction, knowledge acquisition, and knowledge transfer were examined Kölmel &Würtz, 2015). A questionnaire was completed by 396 students and 80 lecturers from four universities in Ghana and Technology. The results revealed that from students' point of view, course design, learning content and prior knowledge were significant predictors of student success. faculty specified that there are six main factors that are important in creating an effective Web based learning classroom: course design, instruction, learning platform, learning interaction, learning content and social presence. The findings of this study will be helpful for educational stakeholders in planning distance learning through blended mode strategies.
In spite of the plethora of books and articles on e-learning, recent studies show that many learners aren't finishing their courses. Often, the problem isn't with the courseware, but with the learners. The authors say that's because employees aren't engaged in the activity. Why? Many don't know how to be effective self-learners. Rather, they're unprepared and have cultivated their habits in classrooms dominated by instructors. But there's hope in ensuring a successful program. First, provide meaningful content. Designers should tailor courses for a range of learning preferences, and that requires the participants' involvement. They should be able to try out what they've learned, and help them identify what they know and don't know - critical for the success of independent learning. Another way is to guide learners into making the appropriate decisions and avoid situations in which their confidence could be lowered. Provide prerequisites and detail where the learners are, what they've done, and what's to come. The authors go on to suggest other ways to ensure that employees won't terminate e-learning prematurely, and they comment on enhancing learners' awareness of the learning process.
Introduction The first generation of e-learning or Web-based learning programs focused on presenting physical classroom-based instructional content over the Internet. Furthermore, first-generation e-learning (digitally delivered learning) programs tended to be a repetition or compilation of online versions of classroom-based courses. The experience gained from the first-generation of e-learning, often riddled with long sequences of 'page-turner' content and point-and-click quizzes, is giving rise to the realization that a single mode of instructional delivery may not provide sufficient choices, engagement, social contact, relevance, and context needed to facilitate successful learning and performance. In the second wave of e-learning, increasing numbers of learning designers are experimenting with blended learning models that combine various delivery modes. Anecdotal evidence indicates that blended learning not only offers more choices but also is more effective. November -December 2003 Issue of Educational Technology, Volume 43, Number 6, Pages 51-54. This article has two objectives: 1. To provide a comprehensive view of blended learning and discuss possible dimensions and ingredients (learning delivery methods) of blended learning programs. 2. To provide a model to create the appropriate blend by ensuring that each ingredient, individually and collectively, adds to a meaningful learning experience. Badrul Khan's blended e-learning framework, referred to here as Khan's Octagonal Framework (see Figure 1) enables one to select appropriate ingredients ( Khan's framework serves as a guide to plan, develop, deliver, manage, and evaluate blended learning programs. Organizations exploring strategies for effective learning and performance have to consider a variety of issues to ensure effective delivery of learning and thus a high return on investment. Figure 1. Khan's Octagonal Framework.
Electronic learning and traditional learning not only can coexist, but can merge to create something far better. A blended solution has the following characteristics: integrated instructional design, consistent framework and nomenclature, each method delivering its best, flexibility, and variety. (JOW)