E-Learning in the 21st century: A framework for research and practice, Second edition

Abstract

The second edition of E-Learning in the 21st Century provides a coherent, comprehensive, and empirically-based framework for understanding e-learning in higher education. Garrison draws on his decades of experience and extensive research in the field to explore the technological, pedagogical, and organizational implications of e-learning. Most importantly, he provides practical models that educators can use to realize the full potential of e-learning. This book is unique in that it focuses less on the long list of ever-evolving technologies and more on the search for an understanding of these technologies from an educational perspective.

Full text

Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 1 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Issues in Distance Education
Series Editors: Terry Anderson and David Wiley
Distance education is the fastest-growing mode of formal and informal
teaching, training, and learning. Its many variants include e-learning, mobile
learning, and immersive learning environments. The series presents recent
research results and offers informative and accessible overviews, analyses,
and explorations of current issues and the technologies and services used in
distance education. Each volume focuses on critical questions and emerging
trends, while also taking note of the evolutionary history and roots of this
specialized mode of education and training. The series is aimed at a wide group
of readers including distance education teachers, trainers, administrators,
researchers, and students.
series titles
Theory and Practice of Online Learning, second edition
edited by Terry Anderson
Mobile Learning: Transforming the Delivery of Education and Training
edited by Mohamed Ally
A Designer’s Log: Case Studies in Instructional Design
by Michael Power
Accessible Elements: Teaching Science Online and at a Distance
edited by Dietmar Kennepohl and Lawton Shaw
Emerging Technologies in Distance Education
edited by George Veletsianos
Flexible Pedagogy, Flexible Practice:
Notes from the Trenches of Distance Education
edited by Elizabeth Burge, Chère Campbell Gibson, and Terry Gibson
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments:
Creating and Sustaining Communities of Inquiry
by Norman D. Vaughan, Martha Cleveland-Innes and D. Randy Garrison
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 2 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Teaching in Blended learning
environmenTs
Creating and Sustaining Communities of Inquiry
Norman D. Vaughan
Martha Cleveland-Innes
and
D. Randy Garrison
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 3 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Copyright © 2013 Norman D. Vaughan, Martha Cleveland-Innes, and
D. Randy Garrison
Published by au Press, Athabasca University
1200, 10011 – 109 Street, Edmonton, AB T5J 3S6
isbn 978-1-927356-47-0 (print) 978-1-927356-48-7 (pdf)
978-1-927356-49-4 (epub)
Cover and interior design by Sergiy Kozakov.
Printed and bound in Canada by Marquis Book Printers.
Library and Archives Canada Cataloguing in Publication
Vaughan, Norman D., 1960-
Teaching in blended learning environments : creating and sustaining
communities of inquiry / Norman D. Vaughan, Martha Cleveland-Innes, and
D. Randy Garrison
(Issues in distance education series)
Includes bibliographical references and index.
Issued also in electronic formats.
isbn 978-1-927356-47-0
1. Education, Higher—Computer-assisted instruction. 2. Teaching—
Computer network resources. 3. Blended learning. 4. Internet in higher
education. I. Cleveland-Innes, M. II. Garrison, D. R. (Donn Randy) III. Title.
IV. Series: Issues in distance education series.
LB2395.7.V39 2013 371.3 C2013-901785-2
We acknowledge the financial support of the Government of Canada
through the Canada Book Fund (cbf) for our publishing activities.
Assistance provided by the Government of Alberta, Alberta
Multimedia Development Fund.
This publication is licensed under a Creative Commons License,
Attribution–Noncommercial–No Derivative Works 2.5 Canada: see
www.creativecommons.org. The text may be reproduced for non-
commercial purposes, provided that credit is given to the original
author.
To obtain permission for uses beyond those outlined in the Creative
Commons license, please contact au Press, Athabasca University, at
aupress@athabascau.ca.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 4 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Contents
List of Tables vii
List of Figures viii
Preface 1
one Conceptual Framework 7
two Design 19
three Facilitation 45
four Direct Instruction 63
five Assessment 81
six Technology 97
seven Conclusion 121
Appendix 127
References 131
Index 139
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 5 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 6 13-11-21 3:58 PM

vii
List of Tables
TABLE 2.1. Examples of activities for establishing a climate that will
support open communication and cohesion 28
TABLE 2.2. Aligning learning outcomes, assessment activities, face-to-face
and online learning opportunities, and technology tools 37
TABLE 2.3. Examples of activities that support systematic inquiry,
discourse, and reflection 38
TABLE 3.1. Facilitating social presence face-to-face and online 50
TABLE 3.2. Facilitating cognitive presence face-to-face and online 55
TABLE 4.1. Inquiry-based project rubric 68
TABLE 4.2. Sample learning contract 72
TABLE 4.3. Practical inquiry model for self-coding discussion forum
postings 75
TABLE 4.4. Discussion forum rubric 76
TABLE 4.5. Student-moderated discussion instructions 77
TABLE 4.6. Practical inquiry model for online discussion summaries 79
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 7 13-11-21 3:58 PM

viii
List of Figures
FIGURE 1.1. Community of Inquiry framework 11
FIGURE 1.2. Community of Inquiry categories and indicators 12
FIGURE 2.1. Summary of online discussion forum collaboratively constructed
in Wikspaces 27
FIGURE 2.2. Course cafe and frequently asked questions (FAQ) discussion
forum in the Blackboard learning management system 29
FIGURE 2.3. Integrating the strengths of spontaneous verbal and written
communication 36
FIGURE 5.1. Co-constructed assessment rubric for a lesson plan assignment
(http://tinyurl.com/lessonplanrubric) 85
FIGURE 5.2. Example of an online journal posting with guiding questions 86
FIGURE 5.3. Example peer review comments for a writing assignment in
Google Drive 88
FIGURE 5.4. Peer review of individual project work using Google's Blogger
application 89
FIGURE 5.5. Group online discussion summary and critique in
Wikispaces 90
FIGURE 5.6. Example of using Google Drive to provide instructor formative
assessment feedback comments 92
FIGURE 5.7. Using digital technologies to support a triad approach to
assessement in a blended community of inquiry 95
FIGURE 6.1. Co-constructed course reading list in Diigo 103
FIGURE 6.2. Peer review of a blog posting of an article critique 107
FIGURE 6.3. Wiki online discussion summary 109
FIGURE 6.4. Student moderated online discussion forum in Facebook 112
FIGURE 6.5. Narrated mathematical problem solving exercise 113
FIGURE 6.6. Class brainstorm results displayed in Wordle 115
FIGURE 6.7. A Blackboard Collaborate session 117
FIGURE 6.8. Students meeting for a virtual class in Second Life 119
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 8 13-11-21 3:58 PM

This book is dedicated to our families
who supported our work on this text.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 9 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 10 13-11-21 3:58 PM

1 1
Preface
The focus of this book is the teaching practices required of blended
learning approaches and designs in higher education. Our previous
book, Blended Learning in Higher Education (Garrison & Vaughan,
2008), in which we defined blended learning as “the organic integra-
tion of thoughtfully selected and complementary face-to-face and
online approaches and technologies” (p. 148) guides us in this goal.
Feedback from the publication of this first book indicated that the
unique feature of this work was the provision of a coherent frame-
work in which to explore the transformative concept of blended
learning. Invariably, as we made presentations and conducted work-
shops, the consistent message we received was about how valuable
the rationale is to understanding the purpose and practical chal-
lenges of adopting blended learning approaches in higher education.
In Teaching in Blended Learning Environments: Creating and Sustaining
Communities of Inquiry, we build upon the framework and concepts
of our previous work.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 1 13-11-21 3:58 PM

2 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
The context of this book is the growing demand for improved
teaching in higher education. Traditionally, faculty members served
as content experts, selecting disciplinary content to be transmit-
ted to students largely through lectures. Unfortunately, most faculty
members do so with limited knowledge of pedagogy and appreciation
of the value and growing importance of engagement in a community
of inquiry. This book provides a coherent and comprehensive prac-
tical view of teaching in higher education that provides a map of the
future in terms of integrating face-to-face and online learning.
Our focus here is on teaching as it relates to the design, facilita-
tion, direction, and assessment of blended learning in contemporary
higher education. The transformative innovation of virtual com-
munication and online learning communities creates new ways for
teachers and students to engage, interact, and contribute to learning.
This new learning environment, when combined with face-to-face
interactions, will necessitate significant role adjustments and the
need to understand the concept of teaching presence for deep and
meaningful learning outcomes. This book defines teaching presence
as the effort and activity around the design, facilitation, and direc-
tion of cognitive and social processes in learning communities for
the purpose of realizing personally meaningful and educationally
worthwhile learning.
Introducing a phenomenon as complex as teaching presence in
a blended learning context is a daunting task. Beyond discussing
teaching with technology, writing this book was a process of expli-
cating, examining, and describing a very different approach to higher
education – an approach that represents the era of blended learning.
We see that “neither the purpose, the methods, nor the population
for whom education is intended today, bear any resemblance to
those on which formal education is historically based” (Pond, 2002,
n.p.). These changes include a new way of conceiving of, and offer-
ing, teaching and learning. The need for, and purpose of, this book
lies in the fact that the context, the technology, and the students
that are part of contemporary higher education are different, and
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 2 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Preface 3
those differences must be accommodated in the teaching practices
of our institutions (Dziuban et al., 2010).
To make these changes relevant and real, the book focuses on
the practice of teaching in blended learning environments. In addi-
tion to addressing new approaches to teaching and learning in higher
education, two central ideas come together. First, information and
communications technology provide the opportunity to create com-
munities of learners that support engagement and collaboration.
The online Community of Inquiry theoretical framework intro-
duced by Garrison, Anderson, and Archer (2000) guides this idea.
The reason their framework is valuable for this task is the active
presence of a teacher at its core, working toward active cognitive
and social presence of all the participants. Distinguished from the
lecturer transmitting accepted knowledge in traditional face-to-face
teaching (“sage on the stage”), or the role of instructor in traditional
distance education (“guide on the side”), the teacher in a blended
environment is collaboratively present in designing, facilitating,
and directing the educational experience.
The second idea that illuminates teaching presence in blended
learning environments is defining principles of practice. We define
seven principles that reflect the realities of new and emerging
information and communications technologies. Moreover, it is
important to recognize that “just blending face-to-face learning
with information technologies cannot provide effective teaching
and efficient solutions for learning” (Hadjerrouit, 2008, p. 29). The
need to go beyond capricious blending of face-to-face and online
activities is revealed in the importance of these principles to allow
us to capitalize on the potential of information and communication
technologies. These principles provide the organizational structure
to this book.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 3 13-11-21 3:58 PM

4 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
content and organization
It takes more than adjusted face-to-face principles of teaching (see
Chickering & Gamson, 1987) to harness all the opportunities for
teaching and learning available through technology. Principles of
practice intended to develop teaching presence in blended learn-
ing communities must account for new, emerging possibilities
and roles. This book offers new principles of teaching presence for
blended learning designs in higher education. The seven principles
emerge out of the requirements of a collaborative community of
inquiry, where learning is situated in purposeful inquiry and where
students collaboratively assume shared responsibility and control to
design, facilitate, and direct inquiry. The seven principles, and the
concepts that provide their foundation, are explored across the next
seven chapters of this book.
In the introductory chapter we describe blending learning,
define the Community of Inquiry (CoI) theoretical framework that
shapes the structure of this book, and outline the seven principles
of blended learning that provide the inspiration for the practical
guidelines and suggestions that constitute the primary contribu-
tion of this book. Successful blended learning is dependent upon
the creation of a collaborative community of inquiry and an under-
standing of the principles of teaching presence that guides, engages,
and successfully achieves a worthwhile educational experience.
Chapter 2 describes the first phase of teaching presence: the
design and organization of a collaborative community of inquiry. It
focuses on the coherent integration of curriculum, climate, active
tasks and assignments, timelines, and assessment rubrics. This
chapter provides a description of successful case studies and exam-
ples that maximize the critical discourse and reflective potential of
blended learning methods and techniques.
Chapter 3 explores the social and cognitive principles of facili-
tation. Facilitation goes to the core of the dynamics of a community
of inquiry. Collaborative communities emerge, and are sustained,
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 4 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Preface 5
through shared purpose, joint activity, and interaction. These com-
monalities must be identified, illuminated, and fostered through
the teacher’s leadership in order to facilitate these aspects of com-
munity. Social presence emerges and cognitive presence evolves
through facilitation. Facilitating social interaction fosters social
presence, which is central to setting the stage for continued col-
laborative activity. However, pushing beyond social interaction to
critical discourse moves cognitive presence to deep and meaningful
learning. Strategies for the facilitation of social and cognitive pres-
ence are described in terms of practical examples.
Chapter 4 speaks to the use of direct instruction. This involves
helping students to manage collaborative relationships in order to
assume increasing responsibility for their learning and ensuring
that students move toward resolution in their course-based discus-
sions and assignments. Direct instruction is about academic and
pedagogic leadership; it is educational leadership that provides dis-
ciplinary focus and structure and scaffolding but also offers students
the choice and opportunity to assume increasing responsibility for
their learning. This instruction is more than a “guide on the side,”
but less than a “sage on the stage.” It is an approach where learning
is socially shared. This is the path to a meaningful, systematic, and
worthwhile educational experience. Students remain engaged and
focused while achieving desired learning outcomes. This chapter
provides practical guidelines and strategies for directing social and
cognitive presence in a blended learning environment.
Chapter 5 addresses the final principle regarding assessment.
Educational researchers (Thistlethwaite, 2006; Hedberg & Corrent-
Agostinho, 1999) state that assessment drives learning in higher
education. The design of assessment activity and feedback influence
the type of learning that takes place (Entwistle, 2000). The purpose
of this chapter is to demonstrate the types of self-reflection, peer
feedback, and teacher-directed assessment techniques that can be
used to support a blended community of inquiry approach to learn-
ing in higher education.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 5 13-11-21 3:58 PM

6 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
Chapter 6 provides a discussion of digital technologies and
instructional strategies that can be used to design collaborative
communities of inquiry. This chapter reiterates the interdependent
elements of social, cognitive, and teaching presence and provides
corresponding social media application examples and associated
collaborative learning activities. Educational strategies for using
these tools to support a collaborative community of inquiry, in a
blended learning environment, are illustrated and discussed.
Chapter 7 concludes the book with a summary of key ideas and
strategies for teaching in a blended teaching format.
Overall, the book is a coherent view of the principles for the inte-
gration of face-to-face and online learning made explicit. Second,
the book is grounded in the actual practice of blended learning.
conclusion
The primary audience for this book is college faculty and gradu-
ate students interested in quality teaching in blended learning
environments. The secondary audience is education technology
professionals, instructional designers, teaching and learning devel-
opers, and instructional aides – all those involved in the design
and development of the media and materials for blended learning.
Other audiences include higher education administrators, education
researchers, and government officials interested in quality educa-
tion issues. While focused primarily on blended learning in higher
education, the principles can be easily adjusted for application in
the K–12 environment and the workplace.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 6 13-11-21 3:58 PM

7 7
Conceptual Framework
The community of inquiry is perhaps the most promising method-
ology for the encouragement of that fusion of critical and creative
cognitive processing known as higher-order thinking. (Lipman, 1991,
p. 204)
introduction
Blended learning has received increasing attention with the infusion
of web-based technologies into the learning and teaching process.
Virtually all courses in higher education incorporate information
and communication technologies to some degree. These technolo-
gies create new opportunities for students to interact with their
peers, faculty, and content. The infusion of information and com-
munications technology in higher education draws attention to the
theory and practice of blended learning.
1
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 7 13-11-21 3:58 PM

8 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
Blended learning inherently demands a fundamental rethinking
of the educational experience and presents a challenge to traditional
presentational approaches. If we are to deal with the theoretical and
practical complexities of rethinking the educational experience from
a blended learning perspective, then the first challenge is to provide
a conceptual order that goes beyond rigid recipes. Such order and
coherence is of particular importance for practitioners who may not
have a full appreciation of the possibilities that new and emerging
technologies present for engaging learners in innovative educational
experiences. It seems to us that a conceptual framework may well
be of the utmost practical value to assist practitioners to navigate
through the educational and technological levels of complexity.
The purpose of this chapter is to describe blended learning
briefly and then to establish the rationale through which we can
explore the practical challenges in implementing blended learning
approaches in higher education. This rationale is operationalized in
the Community of Inquiry (CoI) theoretical framework (Garrison,
2011). The Community of Inquiry framework is outlined with a par-
ticular focus on teaching presence. From this framework are derived
the seven principles of blended learning that shape the structure of
this book.
blended learning described
While it is clear to most that the core of blended learning is the
integration of face-to-face and online learning activities, it is
important to recognize that simply adding an online component
does not necessarily meet the threshold of blended learning as
defined here. In the book that set the stage for this work, Blended
Learning in Higher Education, we provided a succinct definition of
blended learning as “the organic integration of thoughtfully selected
and complementary face-to-face and online approaches” (Garrison
& Vaughan, 2008, p. 148). By organic we meant grounded in practice,
and by the use of the term thoughtfully, we wanted to indicate a
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 8 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 1. Conceptual Framework 9
significant rethinking of how we should be approaching the learning
experience.
With regard to a thoughtful approach, we specifically excluded
enhancing traditional practices that do not significantly improve
student engagement. That said, we do not want to restrict innova-
tive blended learning designs by providing strict parameters as to
the percentage of time spent face-to-face or online. We have chosen
to provide a qualitative definition, which distinguishes blended
learning as an approach that addresses the educational needs of
the course or program through a thoughtful fusion of the best and
most appropriate face-to-face and online activities. The key is to
avoid, at all costs, simply layering on activities and responsibilities
until the course is totally unmanageable and students do not have
the time to reflect on meaning and engage in discourse for shared
understanding.
Blended learning is the inspiration of much of the innova-
tion, both pedagogically and technologically, in higher education.
By innovation we mean significantly rethinking and redesigning
approaches to teaching and learning that fully engage learners. The
essential function of blended learning is to extend thinking and dis-
course over time and space. There is considerable rhetoric in higher
education about the importance of engagement, but most institu-
tions’ dominant mode of delivery remains delivering content either
through the lecture or self-study course modules. Blended learning
is specifically directed to enhancing engagement through the inno-
vative adoption of purposeful online learning activities.
The strength of integrating face-to-face synchronous com-
munication and text-based online asynchronous communication
is powerfully complementary for higher educational purposes.
The goal of blended learning is to bring these together to academi-
cally challenge students in ways not possible through either mode
individually. There is a distinct multiplier effect when integrating
verbal and written modes of communication. An added benefit is
that blended learning sustains academic communication over time.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 9 13-11-21 3:58 PM

10 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
Moreover, students have time to reflect and respond thoughtfully.
Finally, while significant administrative advantages are gained
through blended learning designs (access, retention, campus space,
teaching resources), the focus here is the quality of the learning
experience made possible though blended learning approaches.
In the next section we explore the ideas of engagement and aca-
demic inquiry central to the ideals of higher education. These ideas
are inherent to learning communities and provide the foundation for
implementing blended learning. Learning communities provide the
conditions for discussion, negotiation, and agreement in face-to-
face and online environments with virtually limitless possibilities
to connect to others and to information. Such a community, which
we describe next, frames the principles that shape this book.
community of inquiry
Lipman (1991) has argued that education is inquiry. He suggests,
“The community of inquiry is perhaps the most promising method-
ology for the encouragement of that fusion of critical and creative
cognitive processing known as higher-order thinking” (Lipman,
1991, p. 204). Critical thinking is most often cited as the hallmark of
higher education. Therefore, we view a community of inquiry as the
concept that best captures the ideal of a higher educational experi-
ence. Our belief is that practitioners can create the conditions for
critical thinking, rational judgments, and understanding through
the engagement of a community of inquiry. Both a sense of commu-
nity and a commitment to the process of inquiry must be in place.
The Community of Inquiry (CoI) theoretical framework is
unique in framing our discussion of the practical implications of
blended learning in higher education. It has been the focus of exten-
sive study and validation for over a decade (Garrison, 2011). The
premise of the CoI framework is that higher education is both a col-
laborative and an individually constructivist learning experience. As
such, we have this seemingly paradoxical but essential connection
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 10 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 1. Conceptual Framework 11
between cognitive independence and social interdependence. We
argue that personal reflection and shared discourse are requisite for
higher learning and, practically, are best realized in an educational
community of inquiry. A community of inquiry is where “students
listen to one another with respect, build on one another’s ideas,
challenge one another to supply reasons for otherwise unsupported
opinions, assist each other in drawing inferences from what has
been said, and seek to identify one another’s assumptions” (Lipman,
2003, p. 20).
FIGURE 1.1. Community of Inquiry framework
The three key elements or dimensions of the CoI framework are
social, cognitive, and teaching presence (Figure 1.1). It is at the
convergence of these three mutually reinforcing elements that a col-
laborative constructivist educational experience is realized. Social
presence creates the environment for trust, open communication,
and group cohesion. Cognitive presence has been defined “as the
extent to which learners are able to construct and confirm meaning
through sustained reflection and discourse in a critical community
COGNITIVE
PRESENCE
EDUCATIONAL
EXPERIENCE
TEACHING
PRESENCE
SOCIAL
PRESENCE
Supporting
Discources
Setting
Climate
Regulating
Learning
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 11 13-11-21 3:58 PM

12 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
of inquiry” (Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2001, p. 11). It has been
operationalized through the developmental phases of inquiry – a
triggering event, exploration, integration, and resolution. The third
and cohesive element, teaching presence, is associated with the
design, facilitation, and direction of a community of inquiry. This
unifying force brings together the social and cognitive processes
directed to personally meaningful and educationally worthwhile
outcomes.
Elements Categories Indicators
(examples only)
Social Presence Personal/Affective
Open Communication
Group Cohesion
Self projection/expressing emotions
Learning climate/risk-free expression
Group identity/collaboration
Cognitive Presence Triggering Event
Exploration
Integration
Resolution
Sense of puzzlement
Information exchange
Connecting ideas
Applying new ideas
Teaching Presence Design & Organization
Facilitating Discourse
Direct Instruction
Setting curriculum & methods
Shaping constructive exchange
Focusing and resolving issues
FIGURE 1.2. Community of Inquiry categories and indicators
To assist in gaining a greater appreciation of the categories of each
of the presences (Figure 1.2), we provide indicators and examples
of meaningful activities associated with each presence. A qual-
ity, blended community of inquiry should reflect these activities.
It is important to appreciate each category and its progressive or
developmental nature. For example, teaching presence begins with a
design phase and then progresses to facilitation and direct instruc-
tion to ensure the successful resolution of the problem or task. This
cycle will repeat throughout a course of studies. The developmental
and cyclical nature of each of the presences is perhaps more obvious
within cognitive presence and its phases of inquiry. Social presence
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 12 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 1. Conceptual Framework 13
also has a developmental progression. The first goal in establishing
social presence is to recognize the need for identity with the pur-
pose (academic goal) and not to focus too strongly on interpersonal
relationships. Interpersonal relationships can and should develop
over time, while issues of open communication and group cohesion
must be the primary focus at the beginning of the inquiry process
(Garrison, 2011).
teaching presence
Introducing a phenomenon as complex as teaching presence in a
blended learning context is a daunting task. Beyond discussing
teaching with technology, this task requires explicating, examining,
and describing a new approach to teaching in a new era of higher
education. We see that required changes in higher education are
now emergent, for “neither the purpose, the methods, nor the popu-
lation for whom education is intended today, bear any resemblance
to those on which formal education is historically based” (Pond,
2002, para. 2). These changes include a new way of conceiving of,
and offering, teaching and learning.
We focus here on the teaching presence construct as growing
evidence points to the importance of teaching presence for the suc-
cess of a community of inquiry (Akyol & Garrison, 2008; Arbaugh,
2008; Eom, 2006; Shea, Li, Swan, & Pickett, 2005). The conceptual
framework we offer requires new ways of thinking about the role of
teacher and the role of student. Blended learning provides expanded
possibilities and difficult choices for the educator and participants
in a community of inquiry. The responsibilities of teaching presence
are distributed within the learning community but are not dimin-
ished; the importance and challenge is only magnified. Teaching
presence is enhanced when participants become more metacogni-
tively aware and are encouraged to assume increasing responsibility
and control of their learning. Much attention needs to be focused on
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 13 13-11-21 3:58 PM

14 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
teaching presence if we are to create and sustain the conditions for
higher order learning.
This issue of shared responsibility makes the point that each
participant in a community of inquiry must take some responsibil-
ity for social, cognitive, and teaching presence. This is why the third
element is labeled teaching presence and not teacher presence. It is
not just the teacher who is responsible for social and cognitive pres-
ence issues. All participants in a collaborative learning environment
must assume various degrees of teaching responsibilities depend-
ing on the specific content, developmental level, and ability. From
a cognitive presence perspective, instructor and students must be
prepared to clarify expectations, negotiate requirements, engage
in critical discourse, diagnose misconceptions, and assess under-
standing. Participants must also be aware of social presence issues
and ensure that everybody feels that they belong and is comfortable
contributing to the discourse but also prepared to challenge ideas
respectfully.
The pioneering innovation of virtual communication and com-
munity requires both teacher and student to engage, interact, and
contribute to learning in new ways. The challenge is that simply
providing opportunities for interaction and collaboration does not
provide assurance that students will approach their learning in
deep and meaningful ways. The role of learner in blended learn-
ing environments constitutes multiple roles and responsibilities.
This creates role complexity, as participants must assume varying
degrees of responsibility to monitor and regulate the dynamics of
the learning community. This is consistent with the very nature of
a community of inquiry with shared academic goals and processes.
Moving beyond the premise of shared responsibility, what
requirements are embodied in the art of teaching in a blended
learning environment? First, teaching presence must be true to the
learning objectives of the subject while attending to the needs and
capabilities students bring to the experience. However, the ways in
which the role of effective teaching is crafted in blended learning
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 14 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 1. Conceptual Framework 15
environments are different and more complex. We create a clear
picture of the role of effective teaching in blended higher educa-
tion that creates the conditions for deep and meaningful learning.
As this occurs, change will occur in the classroom, shifting what
is done there as well. As we illuminate and reconstruct the pro-
cess of teaching in higher education through the creation of blended
learning communities, we must also examine the assumptions of
teaching, the practices common to all teaching delivery in higher
education, the new roles for teacher and student that emerge from
these changes, the principles appropriate to the combination of
teaching face-to-face and online, and the relevant changes to assess-
ment strategies.
principles
Principles are essential to the translation of theoretical frameworks
into coherent practical strategies and techniques. Principles become
even more valuable when coping with the complexities of integrat-
ing the potential of new and emerging communications technology.
While the principles of good practice associated with the traditional
classroom have generic value, they do not adequately consider the
collaborative constructivist approaches and communication tech-
nologies being adopted in higher education.
A principled approach to teaching that emerges from a sus-
tained community of inquiry takes us beyond the traditional lecture
all too common in higher education. The principles that shape this
book and give structure to teaching presence encourage students to
assume greater responsibility and control of their educational expe-
rience. To help put the principles discussed here into context, we
begin with a brief examination of the most prominent set of teach-
ing and learning principles in higher education. Those are the widely
cited and adopted principles of good practice in undergraduate
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 15 13-11-21 3:58 PM

16 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
education published by Chickering and Gamson (1987). These prin-
ciples are as follows:
1. Encourage contact between students and faculty.
2. Develop reciprocity and cooperation among students.
3. Encourage active learning.
4. Give prompt feedback.
5. Emphasize time on task.
6. Communicate high expectations.
7. Respect diverse talents and ways of learning.
The Chickering and Gamson principles were generated from research
on teaching and learning and have guided educational practice in
higher education over the last two decades. They were, however,
based on traditional practice, which focused largely on the lecture,
and were generated and intended for face-to-face environments.
Moreover, they were formulated through consensus in a largely
atheoretical manner. These principles are too often interpreted as a
means to improve the lecture format, which is not necessarily how
we can better engage learners in more active and collaborative edu-
cational experiences.
While these principles have served higher education well in
directing attention to good teaching and learning practice, we believe
that these principles need to be updated to address the changing
needs in higher education to become information literate in the age
of the Internet. These principles must be consistent with the ubiq-
uitous connectivity afforded students today. It is time to create a
new set of principles that can better reflect the ideals of a higher
education experience by recognizing and utilizing the capabilities of
new and emerging information and communications technologies.
While these principles are not incongruent with blended learning
environments, there are conditions, assumptions, and properties
of technologically mediated learning environments that require an
update of these principles.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 16 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 1. Conceptual Framework 17
Collaborative constructivist approaches are more than inter-
action and engagement. As valuable as the principles of contact,
cooperation, active learning, feedback, time on task, and respect
are, the collaborative approaches and principles discussed here
address new requirements of the knowledge age of the 21st century.
The educational approaches needed today represent purposeful
collaboration to resolve an issue, solve a problem, or create new
understandings. The educational process outlined here is situated
in the context of a community of learners focused on purposeful
inquiry where students collaboratively assume increased responsi-
bility and control to resolve specific problems and issues.
The seven principles that shape this book are deductively
derived from the CoI theoretical framework. The principles are
organized around the three sub-elements or categories of teaching
presence: design, facilitation, and direction. Within each of these
three functions and areas of responsibility, we address the elements
of social and cognitive presence. Considering the complexity of a
collaborative blended learning experience, considerable care and
thought must be devoted to design, facilitation, and direction.
The following principles provide a map and guide to creating
and sustaining purposeful communities of inquiry:
1. Plan for the creation of open communication and trust.
2. Plan for critical reflection and discourse.
3. Establish community and cohesion.
4. Establish inquiry dynamics (purposeful inquiry).
5. Sustain respect and responsibility.
6. Sustain inquiry that moves to resolution.
7. Ensure assessment is congruent with intended processes
and outcomes.
The first two principles speak to the social and cognitive challenge
of designing a collaborative blended learning experience. The next
two principles address the social and cognitive concerns associated
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 17 13-11-21 3:58 PM

18 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
with facilitating a community of inquiry. The last three deal with
the social, cognitive, and assessment responsibilities of directing
an educational experience to achieve the desired outcomes success-
fully. These seven principles are the first step in providing specific
practical guidelines to the design, facilitation, and direction of a col-
laborative community of inquiry.
conclusion
The challenge now is to explore systematically the strategies and
techniques where we can fuse face-to-face and online learning that
will create purposeful communities of inquiry in the support of
deep and meaningful approaches to teaching and learning. We need
to explore the strengths and weaknesses of face-to-face and online
experiences as we consider each of these principles. This will be
done in subsequent chapters, which will focus on the design, facili-
tation, direction, and assessment of blended learning experiences.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 18 13-11-21 3:58 PM

19 19
Design
Appreciating teaching presence is an enormous design challenge but
crucial if we are to avoid the potential anarchy of the Internet and
the “cult of the amateur.” (Keen, 2007, p.3)
introduction
How can we design a community of inquiry that includes interaction
and collaboration in a blended learning environment? The follow-
ing discussion will direct the instructor to key design elements that
are essential for realizing the potential of a blended learning course.
The design principles explored here will guide instructors in the
design and delivery of an engaging and collaborative blended learn-
ing course.
There is, however, a caveat to our discussion. We believe the
instructor ultimately has control and responsibility for the design
and delivery of an educational experience. At the same time, the
2
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 19 13-11-21 3:58 PM

20 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
Internet and communications technology have “flattened” the edu-
cational world and provided enormous possibilities for learner
choice, flexibility, and interaction. This flattening of the educational
environment should not, however, translate into a diminution of
educational responsibility. Appreciating teaching presence is an
enormous design challenge but a crucial one if we are to avoid the
potential anarchy of the Internet and the “cult of the amateur”
(Keen, 2007). To allow the unpredictable influence of the Internet to
undermine teaching presence would be a grave mistake if the goals
are discourse, critical reflection, and deep understanding.
Our central contemporary educational challenge is how we
design purposeful educational experiences using the potential of the
Internet to bring teachers and learners together in sustained ways,
while not losing the focus and direction central to any educational
experience. More specifically, how do we design an educational
experience that combines the potential for asynchronous online
and synchronous face-to-face discourse in a reflective manner
that provides the time to think deeply and not speed over enor-
mous amounts of content? How do educators balance the flexibility
and freedom of online learning with the expert guidance found in a
purposeful face-to-face learning environment? We address blended
course design and challenges in this chapter. The central challenge of
blended designs rests on the thoughtful combination of the Internet
and the culture of critical inquiry in higher education.
Adding on to excessive workloads or simply reducing class time
will not meet the need for more meaningful learning experiences
in this age of access to copious amounts of information via the
Internet. Nor will we see any improvements in learning satisfac-
tion or in outcomes through faculty development workshops that
work on the margins by promoting the latest techniques. If we hope
to make significant gains in the quality of the educational experi-
ence, which must be the goal as the educational needs of society are
changing so radically, then we must focus on fundamental redesign
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 20 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 2. Design 21
strategies. Design is central to releasing the potential of blended
learning and is the focus of this chapter.
instructional design
Design is a planning process that includes consideration of many
content and process issues related to the intended learning out-
comes. The planning process described here is shaped at the
conceptual level by assumptions, principles, and purposes. Design
begins, prior to course commencement, with a holistic perspec-
tive describing the assumptions and approaches to learning. This
then provides a framework for principles and guidelines that shape
the design process of choosing content, creating student learning
activities of collaboration and interaction, and identifying assess-
ment procedures. Thoughtful instructional design is guided by this
framework, which provides direction regarding content and process
decision points. This broad approach is important; simply focus-
ing on content provides little direction with regard to the process
of constructing knowledge. Design will have a pragmatic impact
on how students approach learning (Garrison & Cleveland-Innes,
2005).
The planning process is further shaped at a practical level by
educational and technical possibilities and constraints. Paying
attention to these conceptual and practical elements is another
challenge in design. The goal is to find a solution with the least
compromise to a collaborative community of learners engaged in
purposeful educational activities. The design approach described
in this chapter is to focus on the educational goals and strategies
and let them determine the instructional technologies that are pos-
sible and appropriate for the purpose. The design process is to bring
into alignment the goals of education with the properties of the
technology.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 21 13-11-21 3:58 PM

22 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
Flexibility is a key design consideration. In an educational con-
text, design is a process that constructs a flexible plan, one that
must be open to the unexpected and allow for change of direction
while staying within the parameters of the educational goals. Design
must not be deterministic and rigid. Design is shaped by instruc-
tional theory, but evolving conditions during implementation
necessitate instructional decisions. As circumstances change (as
they inevitably will) and expectations are negotiated, design adjusts.
As such, design and implementation must not be separated. Design
continues during the implementation phase. The instructor is also a
course designer (unlike the industrial approaches of mega-distance
education institutions), necessitating that an instructor have both
content and pedagogical expertise. An instructional design should
be a resource, an important resource, yet one that is open to modifi-
cation by an instructor with the experience and judgment to achieve
the intended educational goals efficiently.
The educational experience is a complex and dynamic process
that will inevitably produce unexpected results. Design must be
sufficiently flexible to allow considerable customization to meet the
educational needs of a specific group of learners. To help manage
this complexity, designers and instructors need principles to guide
design and implementation decisions. The principles that shape the
community of inquiry are grounded in a collaborative constructivist
view of learning. The quality of the instructional design will depend
upon these principles. These principles, outlined in chapter 1, go
beyond using technology to access and deliver content. We recog-
nize that what is learned is inseparable from how it is learned. The
issue (as it has always been in higher education) is to design the
educational transaction that will engage learners in purposeful and
collaborative activities that support discourse and reflection. In this
regard, technology is an enabler: instructional design that fosters
collaborative engagement is the first challenge if we are to achieve
worthwhile educational processes and outcomes.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 22 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 2. Design 23
Often the challenge is to redesign a course or program of stud-
ies to gain effectiveness, efficiency, and flexibility in a blended
learning context. This demands an evaluation of the current design
from the perspective of engagement, collaboration, and commu-
nity. Deficiencies (e. g., interaction) and constraints (e.g., nature of
the content) associated with the current design must be critically
analyzed and new perspectives considered. Ultimately, the instruc-
tor and designer (often the same person) will determine the end
product. The Community of Inquiry conceptual framework can be
enormously helpful in doing so (Vaughan, 2010a).
In summary, reaching the potential of blended learning neces-
sitates a thoughtful investment in the design process. Thoughtfully
integrating face-to-face and computer-mediated approaches intro-
duces the need for explicit instructional design. This represents
a considerable challenge, which will be amply rewarded in terms
of the quality of the educational experience. Every expectation is
that this more rigorous design process will make greater use of
deep approaches to learning and result in higher levels of cogni-
tive presence (Shea & Bidjerano, 2009). What must be avoided is an
incremental design approach–simply layering additional activities,
such as a discussion board–onto a full course of studies that employs
a deficient approach to teaching and learning (e.g., a lecture). This
can only lead to frustration, dissatisfaction, and diminished learn-
ing outcomes.
Best practices that are applicable to all blended learning course
designs are not available. The possibilities and variations that could
be classified as blended learning do not allow for generalized best
practices. For this reason, we have organized our discussion of
teaching presence around a set of seven principles derived from a
framework consistent with the ideals of higher education. The CoI
framework is the genesis of these principles that frame this book.
In this chapter we focus on the first two principles–the design of
social presence and the design of cognitive presence. While we treat
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 23 13-11-21 3:58 PM

24 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
each of the presences and principles separately for purposes of
reducing complexity, we must keep in mind that there is consider-
able overlap of the presences, and suggestions for one will address
issues for the other.
social presence
Designing a blended or online learning experience requires consid-
erable attention and effort prior to the start of the course. This is
because we are trying to fuse two very different but complemen-
tary modes of communication and interaction. We are challenged
to blend synchronous and asynchronous communication function-
ally, in a way that will be congruent with the educational goals and
contextual constraints. This means making informed design deci-
sions among an enormously broad range of educational activities
and media. Considerable attention is required at the design stage for
blended learning. However, taking the time to create a thoughtful,
coherent course structure will see a pay-off in time and effort saved
during the delivery of the course and in realizing intended goals.
While great benefits are realized in a blended teaching and learning
experience, it does take considerable time and effort, particularly in
the initial design stage, on the part of instructors.
The first design principle, identified below, focuses on social
presence. Social presence, as defined in chapter 1, is not just a “feel
good” issue. Social presence sets the environmental conditions
for higher learning. Research has shown social presence to be an
essential mediating variable between teaching presence and cog-
nitive presence (Garrison, Cleveland-Innes, & Fung, 2010; Shea &
Bidjerano, 2009). Social presence is connected to perceived learn-
ing and persistence (Akyol & Garrison, 2008; Boston et al., 2009)
and the academic goals of an educational experience by supporting
a questioning and reflective predisposition and creating a secure cli-
mate for critical discourse.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 24 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 2. Design 25
PRINCIPLE: Plan to establish a climate that will support open communi-
cation and cohesion.
Establishing and sustaining a community of learners is the focus of
the first principle. First, attention must be given to affective con-
cerns in order to create the conditions for open communication,
cohesion, and interpersonal connections. In creating these condi-
tions, social presence then links directly to cognitive presence and
learning. All the presences are interdependent and influence each
other. The focus of social presence is to support the affect, com-
munication, interpersonal connections, and cohesion that support
the inquiry process and deep approaches to learning required for
cognitive presence.
The design strategy used here has three elements: organization,
delivery, and assessment. Each of the design elements are imple-
mented to support the principle described above.
organization
The organizational structure of a course must consider social pres-
ence and the dynamics of establishing trust as a foundation for open
communication and group cohesion. Building trust must begin even
before the first class. Trust is built by removing the unknowns
about other group members. For example, the group becomes more
familiar by having all group members provide short bios. This can
be done verbally in the face-to-face classroom, virtually in the
online classroom, or both. During the first class, students should be
given time for interaction with other students and the instructor in
order to decrease ambiguity about group members and the instruc-
tor, increase trust, and begin to develop relationships. Small group
introductory exercises, for introductions to each other and the con-
tent, provide this opportunity.
It becomes quickly apparent during the organizational phase
that group cohesion may be complicated by contextual contingencies
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 25 13-11-21 3:58 PM

26 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
related to technology. Content and activities must be structured
and matched to the pedagogical approach and the technology used
throughout the course. For example, it is generally recognized that
starting with a face-to-face experience can expedite setting climate
and developing community. In this regard, when planning the first
session the task of discussing expectations and providing introduc-
tions will need to be approached in different ways in a face-to-face
or online context. In a face-to-face environment, the first session
can be organized around small group discussions, exploring expec-
tations and providing opportunities to get acquainted. However,
support, direction, and examples should be offered in an online
environment, by having participants create a bio page and engage
in some preliminary activities that allow students to discuss the
course and to get acquainted.
Strategies will then need to be developed through collaborative
activities such as discussion boards and assignments to continue to
develop group cohesion and common purpose. Collaborative activi-
ties build social presence. How are these best initiated and then
sustained? A good strategy is to require a group project. Students
in a blended course can meet face-to-face or online synchronously,
perhaps also using web-based conferencing software such as Adobe
Connect or Blackboard Collaborate. The latter is also an opportunity
for the instructor to connect with the class between face-to-face
sessions. Once students get into a project, an online forum or wiki
could be used to construct a presentation or document (Figure 2.1).
Social media technologies are designed to engage Internet
users, more so than the initial flat and information-push websites,
and they provide enhanced interaction for building and sustaining
community development. These ubiquitous technologies provide
a range of asynchronous and synchronous online communication
tools. The key is to understand the capabilities of these tools in
terms of educational goals and objectives, as well as their ability to
sustain social presence in a community of inquiry.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 26 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 2. Design 27
FIGURE 2.1. Summary of online discussion forum collaboratively
constructed in Wikspaces
The technology is an enabler and provides the means to stay con-
nected and to achieve true collaborative constructivist approaches.
Consideration must be given to the effort required to learn to use
the technology (from both the instructor and student perspectives)
compared to the educational benefit. Table 2.1 provides examples of
activities that harness the potential of social media tools in order
to establish a climate that will support open communication and
cohesion. Additional strategies for using social media applications
are further described in chapter 6.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 27 13-11-21 3:58 PM

28 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
TABLE 2.1. Examples of activities for establishing a climate that will
support open communication and cohesion
Activity Description
Introductory
letter or video
clip
Consider composing a letter or creating a YouTube
video clip that welcomes students, briefly describes your
teaching philosophy, and suggests the role you envision
for students in this course. This letter or YouTube clip
can then be posted to an introductory discussion forum
in a learning management system (e.g., Blackboard) where
students can comment on your introduction and also
introduce themselves.
Powerful learning
experience
discussion
On the first day of class, engage your students in an
exercise where they each reflect back on an event that
was a very powerful learning experience for them – it
might or might not have been school related. Have the
students, first, individually record their reflections and
then form small groups to share their learning experiences
and discuss why they were powerful. Debrief as a whole
class about what makes learning experiences powerful and
relate the discussion to the blended teaching and learning
approaches that you have envisioned for your course.
Learning
preferences
inventory
Ask students to take a learning preferences inventory
(a number of them can be found on the Internet) and to
reflect on their individual results. “What specific learning
strategies and study behaviours will help me succeed in
this course?” Individual written reflections can be turned
in or posted to a discussion forum or shared in small
groups.
Discussion with
previous students
Invite a couple of students from a previous class to attend
the introductory face-to-face session or join an online
discussion to talk about the nature of the course as they
experienced it. They can share study approaches they
found helpful and generally give suggestions about how to
take best advantage of the blended learning environment to
be successful in the course.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 28 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 2. Design 29
delivery
When we focus on delivering an educational experience, we go to
the heart of a community of inquiry: It speaks to the ideals of a
collaborative constructivist educational environment and how we
create and sustain purposeful learning activities. Students should
be encouraged to develop personal relationships in a forum specifi-
cally designed for social sharing (Figure 2.2).
FIGURE 2.2. Course cafe and frequently asked questions (FAQ) discussion
forum in the Blackboard learning management system
When we view social presence from a teaching perspective, facilitating
open communication and group cohesion are of central importance.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 29 13-11-21 3:58 PM

30 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
Setting the boundaries of group behaviour accomplishes this.
Clear guidelines must be discussed regarding expectations of both
classroom and online discussion etiquette. To foster engagement
and participation, setting guidelines is best done collaboratively.
However, instructors can encourage and require that certain guide-
lines, if they don’t surface from group discussion, be included. The
following are examples of guidelines that we use for our online
discussions:
1. Do more than state agreement or disagreement. Justify
and support your opinion. The most persuasive opinions
are supported by evidence, examples, reasons, and facts. If
you disagree with something, say why.
2. Do the appropriate preparation, such as reading and class
activity work, before you join the discussion.
3. Keep your comments fairly brief. A paragraph or two is
plenty unless you are posting something that by nature
has to be longer – a short story, for example.
4. Check your message before you send it. Pay attention
to your spelling and grammar, and be sure your message
makes the points you want to make in a clear and concise
way. Remember, other students and instructors can read
your messages.
5. Help move the discussion along. When contributing to a
discussion, read other people’s comments first. Introduce
new ideas, but also build on what others have said (“piggy-
back” on others’ ideas).
6. Keep up with the discussion throughout the course. After
you have made your contribution on a topic, check back a
few times to find out how the discussion is evolving. Does
someone’s comment make you think twice about your
view?
7. Share your experience with your fellow students. You
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 30 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 2. Design 31
may be able to offer advice to someone who is new to the
course.
8. Respect others’ ideas and opinions. Feel free to disagree,
but express your disagreement in a respectful manner.
9. Be positive when offering advice. If one of your fellow
students posts something to be edited or asks for your
opinion on a piece of writing, be encouraging with your
comments. If you see weaknesses in someone’s writing or
ideas, focus on describing the strengths to keep up and the
opportunities for improvement. Put yourself in the shoes
of the other people in the conference discussions.
10. Be gracious when receiving advice. When you post your
work, you are hoping that other people will tell you what
you have done well and suggest useful ideas about how
to do even better. When others are critical, assume that
they are trying to provide a critique, not criticism in the
negative sense. Even if they don’t seem diplomatic, be
gracious in response.
Facilitation by the instructor should be emphasized at the beginning
of a discussion topic in order to encourage students to participate.
Be aware of a common initial risk: If the instructor dominates the
discussion, students may be intimidated and, thereby, discouraged
from offering their thoughts. Once students understand the expec-
tations for discussion, the instructor needs to be present but should
not dominate. This is critical in the early phases of a discussion in
order to model academic discourse. While social presence is cru-
cial, participants must stay focused on the academic objective in a
formal discussion topic. Here are some additional strategies to help
accomplish this task.
1. Timely instructor attention is meaningful to students.
Respond in the face-to-face classroom or online. Model
verbal immediacy behaviours in interactions with students
and encourage them to do the same.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 31 13-11-21 3:58 PM

32 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
2. Share your experiences and beliefs in reference to the
subject matter with students. Support and encourage
students when they provide their own.
3. Course participation has long been left entirely up to
the student. Making participation part of the course
requirements is valuable online and can be so face-to-face
as well. Make participation, in class and online discussion,
a significant part of course grades.
4. Instructors can demonstrate engagement and presence
by summarizing discussion threads at regular intervals.
Once students are engaged and comfortable, have selected
students summarize discussion threads.
5. The discussions in online environments are
documentation of content and learning and are valuable
beyond the process of posting. Encourage students to
incorporate materials from the discussions in their
assignments.
6. Open communication supports a healthy climate for
collaboration, which in turn fosters trust and group
cohesion. Design collaborative activities for learning and
assessment, such as problem-solving tasks, projects, and
small group presentations.
7. Blended environments allow for real-time engagement
and interaction. This can be offered online as well; use
Internet applications such as chat functions, web-cams,
collaborative whiteboards, and interactive video.
In the early stages of delivery for social presence, learners working
online need time to feel comfortable communicating in a primar-
ily text-based environment and must adjust to expressing emotion
and communicating openly without visual or other context cues.
Instructors need to be sensitive and supportive in this regard;
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 32 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 2. Design 33
instructor posts set the tone for openness and comfort, in what and
how they post (Cleveland-Innes & Garrison, 2009).
assessment
The third aspect of design is assessment. While we must consider
assessment from a design perspective, assessment is the seventh
principle, which we will discuss in depth in chapter 5. At this point
we will simply foreshadow a few of the key issues that need to be
considered at the design phase.
First, we must distinguish between formative and summative
assessment. The purpose of formative assessment is to diagnose
misunderstanding and provide constructive feedback and guidance
to ensure continued progress. Formative feedback is particularly
effective in creating and sustaining social presence. Students must be
provided feedback and reinforcement to participate in a community
of inquiry. A community of inquiry is a challenging environment,
and students must be given feedback with regard to their commu-
nication patterns and effectiveness in working collaboratively. As
stated earlier, instructor response and attention is the critical piece
of this feedback. Where social presence is established, students will
be able to identify with the group, feel comfortable engaging in open
discourse, and begin to give each other feedback. This demonstrates
that trust and group cohesion exist, which is essential if students
are to function effectively in a community of inquiry.
We know from the literature on deep learning that educational
context, and particularly assessment, has a significant impact on
outcomes (Cleveland-Innes & Emes, 2005). Graded activities that
require collaboration and constructivist thought will encourage stu-
dents to work to this end. The activities include group projects, peer
assessments, presentations, theory and model building, and struc-
tured academic debate.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 33 13-11-21 3:58 PM

34 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
cognitive presence
The second design principle focuses on the goal of the educational
experience: deep and meaningful learning. The philosophical and
theoretical assumptions associated with this approach are grounded
in collaborative constructivism. From this perspective, a learner,
in collaboration with a community of learners, takes responsibil-
ity to construct and confirm meaning. The context and nature of
this learning experience is defined by the concept of a community
of inquiry and the engagement of all participants in purposeful and
disciplined interaction and collaboration. Building this community
of inquiry begins by designing for four phases of inquiry – problem
definition, exploration, integration, and resolution – through sys-
tematic inquiry, discourse, and reflection.
PRINCIPLE: Plan for activities that support systematic inquiry, discourse
and reflection.
Clear expectations and understanding of the inquiry process should
be presented and discussed in the early stages of the course. Then
the course activities shift to the requirements and assignments
associated with the specific objectives of the educational experi-
ence. These activities and assignments include opportunities for
critical discourse and reflection. Discussion activities are particu-
larly effective at the problem definition and exploration phase. If
the goal is to move the discussion through integration to resolu-
tion, a deliberate teaching presence will be required. Assignments
that best support inquiry are those that have clear expectations
and outcomes (e.g., problem- or case-based). Meta-cognition, or
explicit presentation of cognitive process, can be valuable as part of
the activity to move through these phases of inquiry. This is often
an overlooked component of higher order thinking as reflected in
the inquiry approach. Students should be formally introduced to the
inquiry process and be expected to monitor their contributions and
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 34 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 2. Design 35
activities with regard to the task at hand. This process of learning
to learn, and sharing one’s individual story of learning, should be an
explicit aspect of the design phase.
organization
Designing a blended learning experience should start with orga-
nizing the content and activities. In addition, clear objectives for
content and performance expectations will ensure a productive
educational experience. To realize this advantage, it is crucial that
the course outline, assignments, and grading rubric be posted well
before the course begins. One of the great sources of confusion and
frustration for students occurs when students are not clear about
expectations. For this reason, it is extremely important to plan for
the discussion and negotiation of the course outline and expecta-
tions at the beginning of the course.
Fundamentally rethinking a course for a blended learning design
includes the challenge of covering all the content. As the knowledge
base of most fields of study is growing exponentially, it has to be
recognized that no one course can possibly cover all content on even
the narrowest of topics. The challenge is less about what to leave
out than it is how to organize it around the key concepts; therefore,
during the design phase, the instructor should focus on key con-
cepts and provide organizational models of the content. This can
be done by having students construct their own schema (e.g., con-
cept map) or by the instructor providing the conceptual framework.
This will provide the organizational structure that students can use
productively to explore more deeply the nuances of the subject.
Constructing such schema will provide order and a deeper under-
standing that will stay with the student. Therefore, think more in
terms of the inquiry process, be cognizant of simply transmitting
information and avoid the latter.
The corollary to excessive content is excessive workloads.
Avoid assignments and activities that are not central to the topic
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 35 13-11-21 3:58 PM

36 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
(busy work) or are considered optional. The number of assignments
should allow students time to construct personal meaning and
confirm it through discourse. Constructing and confirming knowl-
edge is an iterative process between discussion and reflection. It
is particularly important to provide students the time to process
information, considering that thoughtful written discourse is rig-
orous and time intensive. Therefore, online discussions cannot be
rushed and should be at least a week in length. Another practical
matter is to ensure that discussion topics have a clear outcome; oth-
erwise discussion will lose focus and stall at the exploration phase.
Finally, it is important to set office hours and let students know
how quickly they can expect a response from the instructor. Open
communication does not mean that you as an instructor are always
present. It does, however, mean you are responsive and regularly
present – predictably present. It is very important for instructors
to manage their time commitment.
FIGURE 2.3. Integrating the strengths of spontaneous verbal and written
communication
Organizational design must also consider how to structure the
course in terms of blending face-to-face and online learning. This
phase of the design process involves thoughtfully integrating
synchronous face-to-face and asynchronous online learning experi-
ences. Integrating face-to-face and online communication requires
Synchronous Asynchronous
integrate
complement
• spontaneous
• ephemeral
• peer influence
• passion
• preferred
• reflective
• permanent
• < intimidating
• reason
• > rigor
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 36 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 2. Design 37
an appreciation of the strengths of spontaneous verbal and reflec-
tive written communication (Figure 2.3).
Another organizational issue is matching the content to the
mode of delivery. Some material may be best suited to a face-to-
face or online context. A risk is that online activities will be viewed
as a separate exercise and may not be perceived as having much rel-
evance or importance as to what is happening in the face-to-face
class. Online activities must be congruent with anticipated goals
in the subsequent face-to-face class. That is, the face-to-face class
must build upon the results of the online activities and be congru-
ent with the learning outcomes and assessment procedures for the
course (Table 2.2).
TABLE 2.2. Aligning learning outcomes, assessment activities, face-to-face
and online learning opportunities, and technology tools
Learning
Outcomes
What do you want your students to know when they
have finished your course (e.g., key learning outcomes –
knowledge, skills and attitudes)?
Assessment
Activities
How will you and your students know if they have
achieved these learning outcomes (e.g., opportunities for
self-, peer-, and instructor- assessment)?
Before a
Face-to-Face
Session
(Online)
How will you help students determine what prior
knowledge and experience they have with the assessment
activity?
During a
Face-to-Face
Session
How will students synchronously interact and engage with
the assessment activity?
After a
Face-to-Face
Session
(Online)
What portion of this assessment activity will require
reflective time for interaction and communication?
Technology
Tools
What tools could be used to help organize, facilitate, and
direct these assessment activities?
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 37 13-11-21 3:58 PM

38 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
In addition, Table 2.3 provides examples of activities that support
systematic inquiry, discourse, and reflection.
TABLE 2.3. Examples of activities that support systematic inquiry,
discourse, and reflection
Activity Description
Student home
page
Have the students construct a home page in a learning
management system (e.g., Blackboard) where they post a
digital image of themselves, a short biography, and their
goals for the course. Icebreaker activities and opening
discussions can then be designed for the first face-to-face
session, which capitalize on the information collected and
shared in these student home pages.
Course outline
activity
On the first day of class, hand out copies of your course
outline and review the key points within a brief Microsoft
PowerPoint presentation. Give students 10 to 15 minutes
to read the course outline and underline, highlight or
make notes about any questions, issues or concerns they
have. Next, ask students to form small groups to discuss
their questions and try to help each other resolve them.
Indicate that you will address questions that remain
after they have first attempted to answer them within
their small groups. Be sure to allow an appropriate
amount of time for students to complete this process.
Then ask students how many had questions that were
satisfactorily answered in the small group. Remind them
that fellow students can often help them see things in
a new light, and point out that they should frequently
discuss questions with other students. Suggest that
they exchange, names, phone numbers, and e-mails with
several other students and then use these peers as a first
line of support (i.e., share class notes, study for tests,
review draft assignments, etc.).
Note: This entire exercise could also be completed within
a learning management system, prior to or during the first
week of the course. Post your course outline, create and
post a narrated Microsoft PowerPoint presentation (e.g.,
Adobe Connect) that summarizes the highlights of your
outline, and set up small group discussion forums to
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 38 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 2. Design 39
facilitate student discussion and resolve course-related
questions, issues, or concerns. The instructor can
answer questions still remaining during a face-to-face
class session or within the main discussion area of your
learning management site.
Introductory
survey
Prior to the first day of class, send an e-mail to students
indicating that you will be using a learning management
system (e.g., Blackboard) to support the course and that
they are required to log onto the site and complete an
introductory survey (perhaps focused on assessing the
prior knowledge or experience students have with the
course objectives and/or discovering why students are
taking the class and what they hope to achieve through
the experience). The instructor can then post the survey
results to the learning management system and have
students discuss the results in small groups on the first
class session. Sample introductory survey questions are
provided in Appendix 1.
delivery
The second design challenge is to consider the dynamics of deliv-
ery. From a cognitive presence perspective, as a discussion develops
it will often be necessary to diagnose misconceptions, provide rel-
evant information/insights, and encourage students to reach some
form of resolution. This will demand more direct instruction. The
process of migrating from facilitation to more direct instruction
may repeat itself throughout a course and is especially relevant to
bring major assignments to a conclusion.
Based on the second principle, the delivery of a meaningful
learning experience is designed by integrating discourse and reflec-
tion. This is complicated by the choice between verbal or written
communication. Discourse in a synchronous verbal environment has
many motivational advantages and, if it is well facilitated, students
will achieve the intended goals. However, asynchronous communi-
cation has another distinct advantage in terms of critical discourse.
Students are able to reflect upon their comments when engaged in
an asynchronous online discussion forum. A good example of the
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 39 13-11-21 3:58 PM

40 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
differential benefits and applications of synchronous and asyn-
chronous communication is brainstorming. Brainstorming ideas in
a face-to-face setting will be energetic, exciting, and productive.
However, brainstorming in an online context will generally be more
focused and generate fewer but more relevant (i.e., quality) ideas.
Online discussions provide opportunities for students who do
not feel comfortable participating in spontaneous face-to-face dia-
logue and debate. Some may still be reluctant participants. While
attending to social presence issues may mitigate this, there may be
cognitive presence opportunities to engage these students as well.
The use of a reflective and rigorous form of communication – the
written word – has the potential to encourage a higher quality of
interaction for more students. A word of caution: The quality of
response may be undermined when grades are assigned based upon
frequency of response. While a grade may be assigned for participa-
tion, the key to quality interaction is to ensure that the discussion
is central to the educational objective and that students meta-cog-
nitively consider the nature of their contribution to the discussion.
That is, consider having students label (i.e., script) the nature of
their response from the perspective of the inquiry process – that is,
an exploratory contribution, an attempt at integration, or perhaps a
suggested resolution.
The following techniques will encourage and foster cognitive
presence in blended environments:
1. Identify, present, and continually refer back to the key
concepts you want students to take away from the course.
2. Make explicit the knowledge, skills, and attitudes students
should learn and develop through course activities.
3. Use triangulation to provide multiple representations and
multiple activities to reach the stated objectives.
4. Engage in provocative, open-ended Socratic questioning
with a view toward encouraging experimentation,
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 40 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 2. Design 41
supporting divergent thinking and many perspectives,
particularly in ongoing online discussion.
5. Promote active engagement in practical applications of
knowledge and shared summaries of discussion.
As noted previously, online activities must be well integrated into
the face-to-face activities, and vice-versa. Face-to-face time must
be valued and not wasted by only delivering content. This time is
best used for engagement and higher order learning. For example,
complex concepts are best explored in a face-to-face context; how-
ever, this does not prohibit having the students read content and
begin an online discussion to identify areas of confusion before the
face-to-face class. Moreover, consideration must be given to fol-
low-up activities. If further reflection and discussion is beneficial,
then this can be sustained in a reflective online environment. Some
topics such as an assigned reading may be successfully handled fully
online with students providing a summary followed by critiques
from other students.
assessment
Assessment structures reveal what is valued and shape how stu-
dents approach their learning. Assessment must be consistent with
deep and meaningful learning. If students are assessed by recall of
factual material and a heavy workload, they will resist approaches
that encourage critical discourse and reflection. They will expect
the instructor to simply present the content in a timely and clearly
structured manner. It is interesting to note that deep approaches
to learning are associated, not only with appropriate assessment,
but with teaching presence in the form of facilitation and choice,
regardless of delivery method (Entwistle & Tait, 1990). Assessment
very much shapes the quality of learning and the quality of teach-
ing. In short, students do what is rewarded. For this reason one must
be sure to reward activities that encourage deep and meaningful
approaches to learning.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 41 13-11-21 3:58 PM

42 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
Qualitative feedback can be effectively provided in a face-to-
face or online context. Online discussion boards are one mechanism.
However, quantitative formative assessment online has an effi-
ciency advantage. For example, formative online quizzes can provide
feedback when needed by the student and do not need intervention
or grading by the instructor. Online quizzes can be used for student
use only or recorded for grades.
Summative assessment is about assessing competence. Sum-
mative assessment makes a judgment, based on quantitative and
qualitative data, about achievement related to intended learning
outcomes. If the intended learning outcomes are deep and mean-
ingful learning, then assessment must be based on assignments that
encourage critical thinking and inquiry. Such assignments can be
analyses of case studies, article reviews, and individual or collab-
orative projects. Grading a collaborative assignment needs special
consideration as tensions and inequities may arise in terms of indi-
vidual contributions. For this reason, consideration should be given
to having students work collaboratively to a point, but then have
students submit individual assignments based on different per-
spectives or components of a larger problem. Even though students
submit individual assignments, the group may, for example, do a
collaborative presentation with a grade assigned for the group.
Self-assessment must be used with caution. While self-assess-
ment may contribute to motivation and satisfaction, the association
with learning is moderate (Sitzman et al., 2010). Therefore, to use
it for summative assessment would carry validity concerns. With
these caveats, the purposes for using self-assessment need to be
very carefully understood. To use it for formative feedback may be
advantageous. In this regard, it could be used to encourage metacog-
nitive awareness by assessing one’s responses.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 42 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 2. Design 43
course evaluation
Student evaluations or ratings of instruction can also be used to
evaluate the effectiveness of the blended course design. This evalu-
ation would consider content, teaching and learning experiences,
student assessment methods, and, most significantly, the appro-
priate use of face-to-face and online learning modes of delivery.
Common strengths of blended designs are the rigorous design
structure and a permanent record for systematic review and upgrad-
ing. This opportunity for improvement can enhance the course and
provide evidence of effectiveness and may also serve as a model to
others when designing their own blended learning courses.
When evaluating a blended learning design, there are tools
that can help us gather important data. One useful tool is the
Community of Inquiry (CoI) Survey (Arbaugh et al., 2008). The CoI
Survey is based on the CoI framework and can measure perceived
social, cognitive, and teaching presence. Together, these measures
will provide an assessment of the community of inquiry and iden-
tify areas where the course has been successful or may need to be
redesigned. As we have stated previously, the strength of blended
learning is providing for active, engaged, and collaborative learning.
For this reason, another tool that may be used to assess engagement
is the Classroom Survey of Student Engagement (classe). This tool
is the course-based derivative of the National Survey of Student
Engagement (nsse), and it focuses on student perceptions regard-
ing the amount of active and collaborative learning, interactions
with faculty members, and level of academic challenge in a specific
course (Ouimet & Smallwood, 2005).
conclusion
The time and attention given to its design are distinct features of
a blended learning course. The practical reality is that a blended
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 43 13-11-21 3:58 PM

44 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
learning course design brings many challenges and decisions; time
must be given on the front end if we are to integrate the differential
strengths of face-to-face and online communication thoughtfully.
Given the inherent complexities in a blended learning design, it
is wise to keep things as simple as possible. That means limiting
content, methods, and technology, while ensuring that intended
educational goals are met. The previous discussion was intended
to provide strategies and identify issues with regard to the orga-
nization of content objectives, the delivery of instruction, and the
evaluation of learning outcomes – all of which need to be matched
with face-to-face and online communication characteristics and
possibilities.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 44 13-11-21 3:58 PM

45 45
Facilitation
You can teach a student a lesson for a day; but if you can teach him
to learn by creating curiosity, he will continue the learning process as
long as he lives. (Bedford cited in Geerdink, 2013, n.p.)
introduction
The existence of this book is testimony to the interest in, and value
of, blended learning environments. Of particular interest is the role
that faculty play. This role is key to a successful blended learning
environment, and a particular requirement called facilitation of
learning is an essential piece. In contrast, blended learning experi-
ences created by adding online access to course documentation and
content material, without instructor presence and interaction, are
blends of content but not learning experiences. Instructors must
learn and employ the skills “to teach and learn in increasingly net-
worked, technology-rich, digital (and face-to-face) classrooms”
3
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 45 13-11-21 3:58 PM

46 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
(Clifford, Friesen, & Lock, 2004, p. 19); virtual classrooms become
the teaching and learning spaces in blended learning.
According to Bonk, Kim, and Zeng (2004), “Blended learning is
typically more complicated and multifaceted than either fully online
or face-to-face learning … instructors must know when to shift gears
or add new tasks or resources and when to let the learners wander
off and explore their own interests” (p. 17). This speaks to the piece
of blended teaching that is facilitation—arranging and support-
ing learner activities and learning, in both online and face-to-face
classrooms. Facilitation exists as the central activity of teaching in
an educational community of inquiry that emerges from the activ-
ity between students and instructor. Facilitative actions, on the part
of both the students and the instructor, create the climate, support
discourse, and monitor learning such that presence can emerge and
inquiry occurs. In the act of facilitation learners connect to each
other and the instructor, engage with the content, are cognitively
present as intellectual agents, and carry out all actions central to the
development and maintenance of the learning community.
This chapter revisits the notions of teaching presence, its cen-
tral elements, and how facilitation aligns with other elements of
teaching presence in blended learning environments. This allows
detailed consideration of the facilitation of social and cognitive
presence and the principles that guide blended facilitation. Of all
aspects of the Community of Inquiry framework, the activities of
facilitation are the most critical; facilitation manages the overlaps
between all three presences and is at the core of the dynamics of a
community of inquiry.
teaching presence revisited
Teaching presence is explained as the effort and activity around the
design, facilitation, and direction of cognitive and social processes
in learning communities created to foster inquiry, for the purpose
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 46 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 3. Facilitation 47
of realizing personally meaningful and educationally worthwhile
learning. It is the central element around which other activities in
a community of inquiry manoeuvre. The three elements of teach-
ing presence—design and organization, facilitation, and direct
instruction—are distinct but not mutually exclusive. Design and
organization must include activity appropriate to the facilitation of
a community, a constructed learning environment, and the engage-
ment of students and teachers and learners. Facilitation is the facet
of teaching presence that ensures that social presence is established
among community members and, in turn, that cognitive processes
are directed to personally meaningful and educationally worthwhile
outcomes. Facilitation remains distinct from direct instruction in
that too much domination on the part of the instructor will intimi-
date learners and diminish engagement. Direct instruction, however,
provides necessary leadership for content accuracy and boundaries.
Facilitation, much richer in nuance and engagement, is the action of
choice for as long as the learners are reaching the learning outcomes.
Facilitation is described as the necessary support and guidance
provided for learners. While chiefly required for the facilitation
of reflection and discourse, facilitation in a blended community
of inquiry becomes multitudinously complex. First, it requires
that all the necessary components outlined for facilitation of an
online community of inquiry (Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2001)
be appropriately created face-to-face. Second, it requires that the
key overlaps between the necessary presences of a community of
inquiry—setting climate, supporting discourse, and monitoring and
regulating learning—be appropriately facilitated both face-to-face
and online. And third, through facilitation the online community of
inquiry will be experienced as linked and contiguous with the face-
to-face community; while they can emerge separately, in a blended
learning environment they must converge as one.
It is important to note that the term teaching presence refers to
the action and role of teaching, and not uniquely to the instructor of
record. Facilitators must acknowledge and support the role of teacher
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 47 13-11-21 3:58 PM

48 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
among students, when appropriate. Students in a community of
inquiry are engaged in a way that fosters self-regulation and moni-
toring, of themselves and fellow learners. It is for this reason that
we refer to this element as teaching presence and not teacher pres-
ence. In other words, everyone has the opportunity to contribute by
way of facilitation and direct instruction. In a blended environment,
the faculty member, as facilitator, must provide the opportunity
and allow similarly for such peer interaction and teaching face-to-
face as well as online. The challenge, of course, is allowing for such
activity while staying connected enough to redirect any inappropri-
ate actions on the part of any particular student. This issue can be
pre-empted with action to set an appropriate, respectful climate at
the beginning of the course.
principles of facilitation
The combination or blending of online and face-to-face interactions
results in a new learning environment that necessitates significant
role adjustments for instructors; there is a need to understand the
concept of teaching presence for deep and meaningful learning out-
comes. While we present this as something necessary for blended
learning environments, it is, in fact, an imperative for education in
a new society (Cleveland-Innes & Garrison, 2011; Keller, 2008). The
following principles of facilitation for social and cognitive presence
in a blended learning environment are part of this required change.
social presence
For students to be socially present they must have the opportunity
to interact. The importance of social and academic interaction in
the experience of students, first socially, and the impact on deep
learning through cognitive presence, is well established (Cleveland-
Innes & Emes, 2005).
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 48 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 3. Facilitation 49
PRINCIPLE: Establish community and cohesion.
A community of inquiry emerges and maintains itself through the
purposeful engagement, interaction, and relationships between
members of the group. The facilitator begins the work of each com-
munity by encouraging, modeling, and supporting these activities,
such that each member of the group may become familiar with, and
possibly find a link to, other members of the group. The strength
and tenor of these links becomes a measure of the amount of cohe-
sion found within each group; this determines whether the group
becomes a community or not. The more developmental and mean-
ingful the engagement and interaction, the stronger the links, the
greater the cohesion, and, once community is established, the more
likely deep and meaningful learning will occur. In the initial meeting
of a group of students, the facilitator plays a key role in ensuring that
community develops. In a blended environment, this requires mod-
eling and encouraging such activity both face-to-face and online.
It would be a significant error to assume that social presence
does not have to be fostered and managed face-to-face. In reality,
it may more difficult and fraught with more challenges than being
socially present online. This is particularly true in large classes;
hence the benefit of blending online interaction in support of the
community that also meets face-to-face.
Social presence requires that one present oneself, socially and
emotionally, in honest and valid ways. In front of the classroom,
instructors present varying demeanours, across time and people.
In the all-important overlap between teaching presence and social
presence, setting climate occurs. First, in the hands of the role of
the teacher, this requires that the instructor set the tone of open-
ness, fairness, safety, and debate. Development of such a climate
and community can be fostered in both the face-to-face and online
learning environments of a blended course or program. Table 3.1
presents a series of strategies for facilitating social presence in the
face-to-face and online components.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 49 13-11-21 3:58 PM

50 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
TABLE 3.1. Facilitating social presence face-to-face and online
Strategy Face-to Face Online
Provide opportunities
for initial introductions
and ongoing social
interaction.
As indicated previously,
this may appear
challenging where
student numbers are
large. First, acknowledge
to the class that
interaction is important
and will be particularly
fostered online. Second,
provide the opportunity
for small group
interaction in at least
the first few classes,
continuously if possible.
The less “talking head”
(transmission by the
instructor) the higher
the engagement.
Ask for and create the
appropriate virtual
space for introductions,
including text and
photos, audio, and/or
video clips. Be explicit
about the need to get
to know each other,
to encourage social
interaction online (but
separate from academic
discussion).
Set agreed-upon, shared
norms for operating
together in the learning
community.
This is best done in
the first class, after
some one-to-one
interaction among
students has occurred.
Ask students to reflect
for a moment on their
most valuable and
satisfying classroom
experiences, and
consider what informal
rules or norms were at
work in this setting.
Ask for suggestions
and document them.
Process for the
following types of group
norms:
Ensure students
understand norms
set face-to-face
apply online, but
clarify any unique
implementation. How
many, and what type
of, posts characterize
being there. How much
is too much? Post
agreed-upon norms,
with clarification, in
the virtual classroom.
Remind students of the
norms when necessary.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 50 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 3. Facilitation 51
Strategy Face-to Face Online
1. Everyone shows up.
2. Everyone participates.
3. Start on time.
4. Respect the airtime.
5. Respect individual
perspectives.
6. Agree to disagree.
7. No hurtful, hateful
comments about
individuals or groups.
Once documented, ask
if anyone has significant
concerns about any of
the norms. Process and
reword as necessary.
Tell the students the
same norms apply
online, and the list
will be posted in the
virtual classroom.
Remind students of
the norms for each
class early in the term;
provide reminders when
necessary.
Discuss the unique
nature of each learning
mode and the blending
of such.
Be explicit about
the similarities and
differences between the
face-to-face and virtual
environments. Be clear
about expectation
regarding presence in
both. Outline any marks
assigned to presence
or participation, where
appropriate. Process
for any questions or
concerns.
Post about, and discuss
online, the similarities
and differences between
the face-to-face and
virtual environments.
Reiterate expectations
regarding presence
in both. Post online
any marks assigned
to presence or
participation, where
appropriate.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 51 13-11-21 3:58 PM

52 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
Strategy Face-to Face Online
Outline required
activities and arrange
support for students
concerned about role
requirements.
Document questions
and concerns. Students
experience significant
role adjustment
when learning
online, which will be
no less significant
when working in a
blended environment.
Discussing these
possible issues face-
to-face, ahead of
significant engagement
online, may waylay such
concerns and increase
adjustment and comfort
working online.
Data suggests that
online students are
challenged by the
new role identity of
learner, the use of the
learning technology, the
design of new learning
activities such as text-
based discussions,
the increased level of
interaction, and the role
of online instructor
(Cleveland-Innes,
Garrison & Kinsel,
2008).
Discuss the possibility
that students may
experience significant
role adjustment
when learning online.
Provide opportunity
for students to state
any concerns about the
online environment
—or anything related
to the course. Create a
FAQ (frequently asked
questions) area online
to present information
about the technology
and working online.
Discuss the unique
nature of each learning
mode and the blending
of such.
Traditionally, social
interaction is frowned
upon in face-to-
face classrooms (no
whispering or passing
notes in class!). Online
environments provide
the opportunity
to allow for social
interaction separate
from the content-based,
academic discussions.
Separate discussions
areas that relate strictly
to social discussions
and community
development, and
forums related to
the content and key
questions related to the
material and learning
objectives. Early in the
course, be explicit about
these expectations.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 52 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 3. Facilitation 53
Strategy Face-to Face Online
Provide opportunities
for students to
introduce themselves
face-to-face if
possible. Emphasize
that social interaction
will be allowed,
even encouraged, in
appropriate areas or
discussion boards
online. As community
develops, students
will use pre-class and
post-class time to greet
and converse with each
other.
Provide explicit
directions for all course
activities; outline and
discuss course content,
skill and activity goals,
and expectations.
Use early classes’ face-
to-face time to outline
and answer questions
about activities,
readings, assignments,
and schedules.
Create an explicit
syllabus with detailed
outcomes, expectations,
assignments, and
timelines. This
document can be
handed out in paper and
posted online.
Post questions and
answers online that
emerged face-to-
face about activities,
readings, assignments,
and schedules. Post the
explicit syllabus with
detailed outcomes,
expectations,
assignments, and
timelines.
Be clear about learner
choice and flexibility.
Where possible, provide
learner choice in
activity, assignments,
content, and leadership.
Be clear about these
opportunities in the
first class.
Be clear about online
learner choice in
activity, assignments,
content, and leadership.
For example, provide
opportunities to
facilitate discussion,
post questions of
interest and interesting
and valuable resources
related to the course
subject.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 53 13-11-21 3:58 PM

54 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
Strategy Face-to Face Online
Provide activities for
instructors and students
to share experiences and
support one another.
Arrange opportunities
for instructor-student
interaction—one-on-
one and group based—
for social and academic
interaction. Interaction
between student and
instructor fosters trust
and reduces barriers to
learning. Be present
socially, as a real and
affective person. As
community develops
over time, social
interaction will fold
into academic discourse
(Akyol, Vaughan &
Garrison, 2011).
Use synchronous and
asynchronous tools to
support instructor-
student interaction –
one-on-one and group
based – for social and
academic interaction.
Arrange virtual office
hours for synchronous
chat. Ensure students
know how to use these
tools. Be present online
socially, as a real and
affective person.
cognitive presence
Facilitating social interaction fosters engagement and a sense of
trust, safety, and familiarity such that social presence may emerge;
this is central to setting the climate for rigorous debate and dis-
course and collaborative activity. Pushing beyond social interaction
to academic interaction and critical discourse moves the commu-
nity from social presence to cognitive presence and into deep and
meaningful learning.
PRINCIPLE: Establish inquiry dynamics (purposeful inquiry).
The inquiry process is both embedded in, and an outcome of, a
cohesive community of learners. The inquiry dynamics are the
engagement and interaction at multiple levels of complexity and
meaning. The practical inquiry process, fundamental to cognitive
presence, requires increasing amounts of cognitive effort and com-
plexity. This process of changing complexity must be facilitated
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 54 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 3. Facilitation 55
through appropriate discourse—from triggering event, explora-
tion, and integration, to resolution. Facilitation is most critical in
the earliest stages of interaction; direct instruction becomes more
important as complexity increases. In other words, facilitation is
necessary to set in motion the inquiry dynamics, but direct instruc-
tion may be employed where facilitation of discourse no longer
moves the inquiry to integration and resolution.
The opportunity for increased interaction, timely reflection,
and continuous debate online provides a very supportive environ-
ment for inquiry dynamics. The following indicators of facilitation
can be used to support inquiry face-to-face and online:
1. Maintain a comfortable climate for learning.
2. Focus the discussion on specific issues.
3. Identify areas of agreement/disagreement.
4. Seek to reach consensus/understanding.
5. Encourage, acknowledge, and reinforce contributions.
6. Draw in participants, prompting discussion.
7. Assess and make explicit the efficacy of the process.
8. Refer to resources, e.g., textbook, articles, Internet,
personal experiences.
9. Summarize the discussion.
These strategies, and others, can be used to support required facili-
tation of cognitive presence. Table 3.2 presents strategies for the
face-to-face and online component.
TABLE 3.2. Facilitating cognitive presence face-to-face and online
Strategy Face-to Face Online
Facilitation is based
on collaboration
and discourse; use
collaborative learning
Inquiry dynamics are
supported through
questions that trigger
use of subject matter.
Discourse refers to the
dialogic interaction
characterizing online
discussion. To make
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 55 13-11-21 3:58 PM

56 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
Strategy Face-to Face Online
principles in small
group discussion and
joint projects.
Triggering events must
be preceded by attention
to the required content
for considering answers
to the question or
curious attention to the
material. The instructor
can bring readings, and
other self-regulated
student activity, to life
by bringing attention
to key points. This
can be done with
visuals, stories,
questions, problems,
and presentation
of information.
Collaboration of
learning activity can
include instructor to
large group (e.g., asking
questions, showing
visuals for analysis,
showing video clips
for discussion). It can
also include group
work, with groups that
include or exclude
instructor input.
Collaborative learning
can extend beyond
triggers to exploration
and integration, and
eventually to resolution
(e.g., what will/might/
should occur?).
discourse collaborative
requires that the
instructor move out of
the role of expert and
into the role of process
leader and learning
support. Link student
comments to the
content, to examples,
and to each other.
Create small groups
of discussion and the
opportunity for joint
projects in assignments
and activities.
Model and encourage
responsiveness and
immediacy behaviours
in interactions with
students.
Show up early and
ready to lead the
class. Be responsive
to students with eye
contact, nods, smiles,
and interaction. Attend
to any queries
Be regularly present
online without taking
over the discussion.
Rather than respond to
each individual post,
provide synthesis and
encouragement.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 56 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 3. Facilitation 57
Strategy Face-to Face Online
or concerns right away,
even if it is just to
make a date to explore
the question or issue
further.
Model and encourage
affective expression
by sharing experiences
and beliefs in
discussions.
Recent findings
indicate the presence of
emotion in education
environments,
particularly in relation
to achievement
motivation and
engagement. Affective
expression is acceptable
and possibly beneficial,
in appropriate amounts.
Be real and affective,
rather than cool,
calculating, and
objective. The online
environment requires
accommodation for
the lack of non-verbal
cues that transmit
information about tenor
and emotion. Share your
thoughts, feelings and
experiences – where
appropriate to the
context and content.
Share the facilitation
of discourse by having
students summarize
discussions.
Enhance the
possibility of cognitive
engagement by allowing
students to lead
discussions and/or
present content. Share
the lead in class.
This is somewhat
trickier online; if
students are off
the mark in their
summations, it is in text
and semi-permanent.
Monitor and make
corrections with care.
Model and encourage
critical questioning,
divergent thinking, and
multiple perspectives
in discussion through
provocative, open-
ended questions.
Ask reflective and
critical questions
during class: So,
what does this mean?
What’s missing in this?
What else might be
influencing this?
Online, you can also ask
reflective and critical
questions. Here the
link to the material
becomes somewhat
more important as
students can’t ask for
clarification and get an
immediate response.
Open-ended, abstract
questions can be
augmented with clear
reference to content or
examples.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 57 13-11-21 3:58 PM

58 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
Strategy Face-to Face Online
Model and request
practical applications
of knowledge and/or
formulate and resolve a
problem in small group
discussions.
Using a problem-based
approach, provide
opportunities to
explore, apply, and
integrate subject matter
content to well-known,
meaningful issues – in
small, medium, and
large group activities.
The above supports
this strategy as well.
Use questions that go
beyond the immediate
factual knowledge into
practical application.
Text can get tedious
here; use audio or
video inserts wherever
possible. Facilitate to
resolution – what do
the students think could
or should be done?
Encourage and support
the progression of
inquiry in discussion
and small group
activities through
triggering events,
exploration, and
integration to
resolution.
Make the cognitive
progression explicit.
Assist students through
layered activities that
build on each other
through triggering
events, exploration,
and integration, to
resolution. Teach
committed relativism;
have students take a
position and defend
it, knowing that
there are multiple
perspectives and
layers of authoritative
knowledge (Perry, 1981).
Again, make the
cognitive progression
explicit. Layer the
discussion so it builds
through triggering
events, exploration,
and integration, to
resolution. Reemphasize
committed relativism;
have students take a
position and defend it,
knowing that there are
multiple perspectives
(Perry, 1981).
Use development or
scaffolding of both
content and processes
to support behaviours
that move discourse
through integration to
resolution.
Use questions, debate,
quotations, and
evidence in varying
degrees to demonstrate
to students multiple
strategies of argument.
Along with Perry’s
notions of committed
relativism are important
tenets of argumentation.
Post questions and
encourage debate
with sound evidence
in varying degrees to
demonstrate to students
multiple strategies of
argument.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 58 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 3. Facilitation 59
Strategy Face-to Face Online
Use discussion
summaries to identify
steps in the knowledge
creation process.
Reflect back to students
their important points
about process and
content – what worked,
what needs work.
This is easier to do
online! However,
summaries must be
inclusive (try to find
something from posts
by each student) and
corrections carefully
made.
Use discussion material
to illuminate course
content and encourage
students to incorporate
content from
discussions in their
assignments.
Identify the link back
to course content; use
course material with
additional support from
student experiences
and additional
resources.
Discussion forums
become course content,
when accurate and
academic. Make sure
students recognize and
use valuable forums in
their learning activities
and assignments.
Use peer review to
engage students in
a cycle of practical
inquiry.
Once the practical
inquiry cycle is
understood and is in
use, allow students
to provide this same
level of feedback to
each other. Observe
and support. Maximize
collaborative activities,
such as problem-
solving tasks, projects,
and small-group
discussions. Over
time, reduce instructor
presence in discussion
and increasingly
facilitate student-led
academic discourse.
This is also a little
trickier online. Review
norms of operation so
peer review is done with
respect and support.
Provide opportunity for
students to facilitate
their own forums.
Maximize collaborative
activities – problem-
solving tasks, projects,
and small-group
discussion.
Maximize virtual
connection and
collaboration by
including synchronous
communications; chat,
collaborative
Text can get very dry!
Use the technology to
augment interaction
but ensure students are
competent or adjusting
– don’t assume all can
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 59 13-11-21 3:58 PM

60 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
Strategy Face-to Face Online
whiteboards, interactive
video, blogs, wikis,
YouTube, Flickr,
MySpace, etc.
use, or are comfortable
using, any technology
tools.
facilitating the blend
The face-to-face learning environment has long been dominated by
a lecture format, with students passively listening and instructors
presenting. This has been criticized as an ineffective way to facili-
tate learning, and many strategies have been suggested to change
this. The opportunity for interaction, discussion, and debate in the
online environment has provided more evidence of the value of such
activities.
Discussion is not left for the online environment. The notion
of blending learning environments through the combination of
learning activities face-to-face and virtually is discussed in other
places in this book. This review of facilitation in blended environ-
ments considers that equal weight, with differing actions, be given
to both face-to-face and virtual environments. We share two key
critical strategies: make explicit links from activities in one mode to
the other, and, where possible, use audio/video clips of face-to-face
activity to link to activity online. In other words, make reference
in the face-to-face environment current and key activities occur-
ring online, and vice-versa. This mends any seam that may occur
between two environments, making the community seamless.
It may be difficult to think of blended facilitation as performing
the same action in each environment. In fact, this may not be pos-
sible, or desired. However, the desired outcomes related to creating
social presence and cognitive presence must be considered as nec-
essary in each environment. In other words, we cannot expect that
learners who socially and cognitively present online will also do so
when meeting face-to-face. The opposite is also true. This means
that, while the instructional activity may or may not be the same,
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 60 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 3. Facilitation 61
facilitation of each presence must be attended to in each environ-
ment, and in the notion of the blend. While it is not necessary to
do the same thing in each environment – in fact, this may be dif-
ficult – doing some of the same in each environment with explicit
reference to the activities at other times and in the other format
provides continuity.
It may be that we know more about how to create social and
cognitive presence online than face-to-face. This is because of the
opportunity for time-independent interaction; learners and the
instructor can offer ideas and considerations when, and for as long
as, they like. Facilitation strategies that can be variously employed
face-to-face or online have been described in this chapter.
conclusion
Collaborative communities emerge, and are sustained, through
shared purpose, joint activity, and interaction. These commonalities
must be identified, illuminated, and fostered through the leadership
of the teacher to facilitate these aspects of community. It is through
facilitation that social presence emerges and cognitive presence
evolves.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 61 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 62 13-11-21 3:58 PM

63 63
Direct Instruction
Direct instruction recognizes the continuous need for the expertise
of an experienced and responsible teacher who can identify the ideas
and concepts worthy of study, provide the conceptual order, organize
learning activities, guide the discourse, offer additional sources of
information, diagnose misconceptions, and interject when required.
(Garrison, 2011, p. 60)
introduction
At the outset, let’s be clear about what direct instruction is not.
Direct instruction is not lecturing. While it may provide informa-
tion, suggestions, and direction, it is not antithetical to collaborative
constructive (i.e., engaged) approaches to learning. Direct instruc-
tion is about ensuring that students achieve intended learning
outcomes in a timely fashion without unnecessary frustration. It
is an essential ingredient in any formal educational experience if
4
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 63 13-11-21 3:58 PM

64 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
we are to have assurance that worthwhile learning outcomes are
realized.
Direct instruction is a crucial and developmental component of
teaching presence in a community of inquiry. It has been shown that
students expect structure and leadership (Garrison & Cleveland-
Innes, 2005). Moreover, the complexity of blended learning design
possibilities necessitates the need for structure and scholarly lead-
ership. Given organizational structure (i.e., instructional design),
direct instruction provides the leadership that will focus discourse
and resolve issues in ways that facilitation alone is not intended to
do. In formal educational learning environments, it is expected that
discourse be purposeful, rigorous, and productive. This is the func-
tion of direct instruction. Evidence strongly suggests that perceived
learning and satisfaction are associated with strong leadership
(Akyol & Garrison, 2011b; Garrison, 2011).
Teaching presence has a natural developmental process. As we
have explored in previous chapters, design and facilitation respon-
sibilities most often demand the greatest attention as we create
communities of inquiry. However, direct instruction issues will
inevitably arise in our attempt to sustain open communication,
group cohesion, and focused inquiry. These tasks go directly to sus-
taining a constructive social presence that is the foundation of a
community of inquiry. From a social presence perspective, direct
instruction is intended to maintain the educational and academic
climate and direction.
Direct instruction, however, is also about focusing and resolv-
ing cognitive presence issues. Direct instruction recognizes the
continuous need for “the expertise of an experienced and responsi-
ble teacher who can identify the ideas and concepts worthy of study,
provide the conceptual order, organize learning activities, guide the
discourse, offer additional sources of information, diagnose mis-
conceptions, and interject when required” (Garrison, 2011, p. 60).
Through these direct interventions we can be assured of an effective
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 64 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 4. Direct Instruction 65
and efficient educational experience. That said, it is not inevitable
that the instructor of record provide these services.
Notwithstanding the essential role of an experienced instruc-
tor, participants in a community of inquiry must be encouraged
and afforded the opportunity to provide direction when necessary.
The instructor should intervene only when significant issues arise
that arrest the progress of timely development. These interventions
must be limited if participants are to gain metacognitive awareness,
responsibility, and control (monitoring and management) of their
learning. Nothing will shut down discourse and undermine group
cohesion faster than excessive direct intervention by the instruc-
tor. This goes to the core of understanding that teaching presence
is a distributed responsibility and realizing that the ultimate goal of
learning is to think and learn.
In previous chapters, we have explored the practical implications
of the teaching presence principles for the design and facilitation of
a blended community of inquiry. We now focus our attention on the
direct instruction principles for creating and sustaining a blended
community of inquiry. A successful blended community of inquiry
and learning experience will be shaped by more than passive guid-
ance. It will require content and pedagogical expertise to anticipate
and proactively shape the environment and direction of the educa-
tional process in real time.
social presence
The first principle for direct instruction is associated with sus-
taining a supportive environment and addressing issues that may
undermine the trust and sense of belonging within the group.
PRINCIPLE: Sustain respect and responsibility.
This principle is associated with social presence responsibilities.
We need to remind ourselves that social presence is concerned with
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 65 13-11-21 3:58 PM

66 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
open communication, group cohesion, and interpersonal relation-
ships. Maintaining an open and cohesive community of inquiry
requires a sensitive and sustained focus. Sustaining the climate,
committing to the collaborative process, and developing inter-
personal relationships is the essence of this principle. During the
facilitation process, the challenge was to establish these proper-
ties of a community of inquiry. Once established, the challenge is
to ensure that they grow and to address issues that may undermine
the climate that mediates academic discourse.
From a social presence perspective, one of the important
responsibilities of direct instruction is to be active in ensuring that
open communication is not undermined by insensitive personal
comments or overly critical, unproductive postings. Participants
must be encouraged to question the substance of messages, but
this must be done respectfully, constructively, and with academic
insight. Communication and trust is a particular challenge in online
environments, and particular attention is required to ensure that
the community and working groups maintain a collegial atmosphere
if they are to stay collaboratively focused on the task. That is, they
remain trustful and identify with the group (maintain goal clarity
and group cohesion) to ensure successful completion of collabora-
tive tasks.
Group cohesion is also enhanced through interpersonal rela-
tionships. If issues are addressed when they arise, then participants
will naturally stay connected and develop interpersonal relation-
ships that will support learning during and beyond the course of
studies. Particular attention needs to be given to these issues when
working asynchronously online. Resolving relationship conflict is
more challenging in virtual contexts (Bierly, Stark, & Kessler, 2009),
and direct instructional interventions will be required to ensure
effective collaboration. On the other hand, much can be done in the
face-to-face environment to mitigate social presence issues that
may arise over time. Relationship conflict can be mitigated in face-
to-face settings.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 66 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 4. Direct Instruction 67
Engagement is central to a blended learning experience. The
strength of blended learning is the ability to create and sustain
engagement in a community of inquiry. Direct instruction must
be seen as enhancing academic engagement. At the outset we need
to note that sustaining productive discourse and cognitive pres-
ence requires the right balance of social presence. Too much social
presence can undermine inquiry as much as too little. It is crucial
that direct instruction ensures that personal relationships do not
inhibit students from challenging ideas and offering constructive
alternatives. One thing to watch for is personal/social relationships
getting in the way of students providing honest critiques of each
other’s work. This may be a particular issue in a face-to-face envi-
ronment. The converse may be a more likely challenge in a virtual
environment.
The opportunity for greater independence and reflection in a
virtual environment is an advantage but also a challenge. This raises
the importance of direct instruction if we are to ensure open com-
munication (climate/trust), cohesion (focus/collaboration), and the
development of positive interpersonal relationships (familiarity
with abilities/beliefs). Direct instruction addresses the strengths
and weaknesses of face-to-face and online learning dynamics. All
of this is directed to resolving problems and enhancing learning
outcomes.
Guidelines associated with this principle are to be supportive,
but expect students to be self-directed and work collaboratively to
complete tasks. From a teaching presence perspective, there will be
a stage in terms of group dynamics where tensions and conflicts
will arise. It is crucial that the teacher addresses these situations
directly and resolves conflicts, by negotiating expectations or cor-
recting a student who is out of line (e.g., using excessive or flaming
messages). Students should also feel that they can question the
teacher and will be treated respectfully. Team-building activities
will give students the opportunity to develop connections and build
community support to accomplish the assigned tasks.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 67 13-11-21 3:58 PM

68 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
Effective educational strategies for this first principle of direct
instruction include providing students with opportunities to dis-
cuss and clarify expectations, roles and responsibilities of team
members through the use of inquiry-based project work guidelines,
learning contracts, and assessment activities.
Inquiry-based project work involves a group of students inves-
tigating a worthy question, issue, problem, or idea. This is the type
of authentic project work that those working in the disciplines actu-
ally undertake to create or build knowledge. These projects involve
serious engagement and investigation. Two resources that we have
found of particular value to guide inquiry-based project work are
the Team-Based Learning Collaborative and the Galileo Educational
Network.1
Team-based learning (tbl) involves sequencing individual
tasks, group work, and immediate feedback to create an educa-
tional environment in which students increasingly hold each other
accountable for each other’s learning and academic success. The
Galileo Educational Network has developed an inquiry-based proj-
ect rubric that consists of eight dimensions. The key components
and descriptors for this rubric are highlighted in Table 4.1.
TABLE 4.1. Inquiry-based project rubric
Dimension of
Inquiry
Descriptors
1. Authenticity • The inquiry study emanates from a question,
problem, or exploration that has meaning to the
students.
• The inquiry study originates with an issue, problem,
question, exploration, or topic that provides
opportunities to create or produce something that
contributes to the world’s knowledge.
1 These resources are available online: Team-Based Learning Collaborative
(http://www.teambasedlearning.org/) and the Galileo Educational Network
(http://www.galileo.org/inquiry-what.html).
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 68 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 4. Direct Instruction 69
Dimension of
Inquiry
Descriptors
• The tasks or task require(s) a variety of roles or
perspectives.
2. Academic rigour • The inquiry study leads students to build knowledge
that leads to deep understanding.
• Students are provided with multiple, flexible ways to
approach the problem, issue, or question under study
that use methods of inquiry central to the disciplines
that underpin the problem, issue, or question.
• The inquiry study encourages students to develop
habits of mind that encourage them to ask questions
concerning the following:
› evidence (How do we know what we know?)
› viewpoint (Who is speaking?)
› pattern and connection (What causes what?)
› supposition (How might things have been
different?)
› why it matters (Who cares?)
3. Assessment • On-going assessment is woven into the design of the
inquiry study providing timely descriptive feedback
and utilizing a range of methods, including peer
and self-assessment. Assessment guides student
learning and teacher’s instructional planning.
• The study provides opportunities for students to
reflect on their learning using clear criteria that they
helped to set. The students use these reflections to
set learning goals, establish next steps, and develop
effective learning strategies.
• Teachers, peers, experts from outside the classroom,
and the student are involved in the assessment of
the work.
4. Beyond the school • The study requires students to address a semi-
structured question, issue, or problem that is
relevant to curriculum outcomes, but grounded in
life and work beyond the school.
• The study requires students to develop
organizational and self-management skills in order
to complete the study.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 69 13-11-21 3:58 PM

70 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
Dimension of
Inquiry
Descriptors
• The study leads students to acquire and use
competencies expected in high-performance work
organizations (e.g., team work, problem solving,
communications, decision making, and project
management).
5. Use of digital
technologies
• Technology is used in a purposeful manner that
demonstrates an appreciation of new ways of
thinking and doing. The technology is essential in
accomplishing the task.
• The study requires students to determine which
technologies are most appropriate to the task.
• The study requires students to conduct research,
share information, make decisions, solve problems,
create meaning, and communicate with various
audiences inside and outside the classroom.
• The study makes excellent use of digital resources.
• The study requires sophisticated use of multimedia/
hypermedia software, video, conferencing,
simulation, databases, programming, etc.
6. Active exploration • The study requires students to spend significant
amounts of time doing fieldwork, design work, labs,
interviews, studio work, construction, etc.
• The study requires students to engage in real,
authentic investigations using a variety of media,
methods, and sources.
• The study requires students to communicate what
they are learning with a variety of audiences through
presentations, exhibitions, websites, wikis, blogs,
etc.
7. Connecting with
experts
• The study requires students to observe and interact
with experts with relevant expertise and experience
in a variety of situations.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 70 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 4. Direct Instruction 71
Dimension of
Inquiry
Descriptors
• The tasks are designed in collaboration with experts,
either directly or indirectly. The inquiry requires
adults to collaborate with one another and with
students on the design and assessment of the
inquiry work.
8. Elaborated
communication
• Students have extended opportunities to support,
challenge, and respond to each other’s ideas as they
negotiate a collective understanding of relevant
concepts.
• Students have opportunities to negotiate the
flow of conversation within small and large group
discussions.
• Students have opportunities to choose forms of
expression to express their understanding.
• The inquiry provides opportunities for students to
communicate what they are learning with a variety of
audiences.
Adapted from Galileo Educational Network (2011)
In addition, learning contracts can be a useful tool for helping
students to plan and complete inquiry-based project work. These
contracts should be constructed by the student and reviewed by the
instructor for constructive feedback and suggestions for modifi-
cation. Both the student and the instructor should sign the final
version of the learning contract. The contract then serves as an
outline for the project and a tool to aid in the assessment process.
Modification of the learning contract may become necessary as
the learning experience progresses. Modified contracts should be
approved and signed by both students and the instructor. Table
4.2 is an example of a learning contract, adapted from the work of
Knowles (1986).
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 71 13-11-21 3:58 PM

72 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
TABLE 4.2. Sample learning contract
What are
you going
to learn?
(objectives)
How
are you
going to
learn it?
(resources
and
strategies)
Target
date for
completion
How are
you going
to know
that you
learned
it?
(evidence)
How are
you going
to prove
that you
learned
it?
(verifi-
cation)
Instructor
feedback
(assessment)
Itemize what
you want to
be able to do
or know when
completed.
What do you
have to do in
order meet
each of the
objectives
defined?
When do
you plan to
complete
each task?
What is the
specific task
that you are
to complete
in order to
demonstrate
learning?
Who will
receive the
product of
your learning
and how will
they assess
it?
How well
was the task
completed?
Provide an
assessment
decision.
I have reviewed and find acceptable the above learning contract.
Date: Student: Instructor:
Adapted from Knowles (1986)
For an inquiry-based project or activity, it is critical that the assess-
ment techniques are congruent and clearly aligned with the learning
outcomes for the course. As demonstrated in the Galileo inquiry
rubric (http://www.galileo.org/research/publications/rubric.pdf), an
instructor should provide a range of methods and opportunities for
student assessment. Chapter 5 will provide specific examples of
self-, peer-, and instructor-assessment strategies.
cognitive presence
The second direct instruction principle addresses cognitive pres-
ence issues. This concerns scholarly leadership and is associated
with critical discourse, reflection, and progression through the
phases of practical inquiry.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 72 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 4. Direct Instruction 73
PRINCIPLE: Sustain inquiry that moves to resolution
Direct instruction is specifically tasked with ensuring systematic
and disciplined inquiry. Sustaining purposeful inquiry includes
several overlapping responsibilities. The overriding responsibility
of direct instruction is to ensure that participants move through
the inquiry phases and that they do so in a timely manner. This
was one of the challenges revealed in the early research into the
Community of Inquiry framework (Garrison, 2011). In addition to
task design deficiencies, it was found that direct instruction was
lacking in terms of moving to resolution. Ensuring progression to
the resolution phase in the context of collaborative inquiry requires
that participants maintain focus on the task and that issues are
resolved quickly. While focus and progression are important issues,
this should not exclude exploring worthwhile unintended avenues
of inquiry. This must, however, be managed in the context of insur-
ing that intended educational goals are achieved.
To ensure developmental progression requires persistent
attention to a number of related issues such as diagnosing mis-
conceptions, providing essential content, and offering conceptual
order when necessary. At times it may be necessary to renegotiate
expectations. Similarly, intervening to address misconceptions and
unproductive lines of inquiry in a collaborative and non-authoritar-
ian manner is essential to maintaining participation and cohesion in
a community of inquiry. While it is advantageous that participants
take on this responsibility, as much as can be expected (remaining
true to the essence of the teaching presence construct), inevitably
the content and pedagogical expertise of the instructor of record
will be required. This must not be abandoned falsely in the name
of community. In what may seem a paradox, a successful educa-
tional community of inquiry is very much dependent upon direct
instruction.
Managing discourse in face-to-face and online environments
presents different challenges. In face-to-face discussion, time is a
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 73 13-11-21 3:58 PM

74 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
precious element that may demand vigilant monitoring and man-
agement depending on the particular task. In plenary discussions,
it may be advantageous for the instructor to take a lead role in
managing and modeling discourse. In breakout groups, however,
participants should be expected to assume greater responsibility
for facilitating and directing the discussion. On the other hand, the
reflective nature of online discourse may require participants to take
a greater role in directing the discussion. This is a great opportunity
for participants to develop these essential abilities. This should not,
however, be in the total absence of the instructor. In either case,
participants need to have some awareness of the goals of the task
and the time constraints.
Direct instruction plays an important role in enhancing meta-
cognitive awareness and action. Sharing the thought processes of
a discipline expert will reveal reflective processes and model dis-
course. At the outset, students need to be introduced to the inquiry
process to increase their awareness of the inquiry process and dis-
cuss why it is important to monitor and manage learning.
Akyol and Garrison (2011a) provide a metacognitive con-
struct consisting of knowledge, monitoring, and regulation of
cognition contextualized within the Community of Inquiry frame-
work. They also report, “Students became metacognitively mature
through explaining, questioning, clarifying, justifying or provid-
ing strategies reciprocally within a community of inquiry” (p. 188).
Metacognition begins with the knowledge or awareness of metacog-
nition. Monitoring (assessment) and managing (planning) learning
requires that students be provided with a conceptual understanding
as well as a model of discourse for deep and meaningful thinking
and learning. In turn, the likelihood of moving through the inquiry
stages will be greatly enhanced when participants have this meta-
cognitive awareness and are encouraged to assume responsibility for
developing, monitoring and managing abilities.
Metacognition, however, is challenging in a community of
inquiry, as we must consider individual and shared monitoring and
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 74 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 4. Direct Instruction 75
regulation. As Akyol and Garrison (2011a) suggest, “Metacognition
in an online learning community is defined as the set of higher
knowledge and skills to monitor and regulate manifest cognitive pro-
cesses of self and others [emphasis added]” (p. 184). Metacognition
requires feedback and this responsibility must be shared through
discourse. This once again points to the collaborative and dis-
tributive nature of teaching presence, including direct instruction.
Students must be encouraged to explain their thinking and, stra-
tegically, how it will facilitate achieving resolution. Practices that
can improve metacognitive abilities are peer assessments, collec-
tive reflection, and modeling metacognitive processes. Journals may
be helpful to encourage students to reflect metacognitively on the
learning process. It may also be advantageous for students to moni-
tor and manage topics of discussion formally.
With regard to having students formally monitor their partici-
pation in online discussion, several strategies can be utilized by a
course instructor. For example, students could be required to use
the practical inquiry model to self-code their discussion postings
for cognitive presence using the information presented in Table 4.3.
TABLE 4.3. Practical inquiry model for self-coding discussion forum
postings
Phase Description
Triggering event This phase initiates the inquiry process through a well-
thought-out activity to ensure full engagement and buy-
in from the students. This has several positive outcomes
in terms of involving students, assessing the state of
knowledge, and generating unintended but constructive
ideas.
Exploration This phase focuses first on understanding the nature of
the problem and then searching for relevant information
and possible explanations.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 75 13-11-21 3:58 PM

76 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
Phase Description
Integration This phase moves into a more focused and structured
phase of constructing meaning. Decisions are made about
the integration of ideas and how order can be created
parsimoniously.
Resolution This phase is the resolution of the dilemma or problem,
whether that is reducing complexity by constructing
a meaningful framework or discovering a contextually
specific solution. This confirmation or testing phase may
be accomplished by direct or vicarious action.
Another strategy is to co-create a discussion grading rubric with the
students so that they can self-assess the quality of their postings.
Table 4.4 provides an example of a discussion forum rubric that can
be used to achieve this goal.
TABLE 4.4. Discussion forum rubric
Points Inerpretation Grading Criteria
4 Excellent (A) The posting is accurate, original, relevant;
it teaches us something new and is well
written. Four-point comments add substantial
teaching presence to the course, and stimulate
additional thought about the issue under
discussion.
3 Above average (B) The posting lacks at least one of the above
qualities, but is above average quality. A
three-point comment makes a significant
contribution to our understanding of the issue
being discussed.
2 Average (C) The comment lacks two or three of the
required qualities. Comments that are based
upon personal opinion or personal experience
often fall within this category.
1 Minimal (D) The comment presents little or no new
information. However, one-point comments
may provide social presence and contribute to
a collegial atmosphere.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 76 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 4. Direct Instruction 77
Points Inerpretation Grading Criteria
0 Unacceptable (F) The comment adds no value to the discussion.
No
penalty
Excellent subject
field
The subject field conveys the main point of the
posting. The reader clearly understands the
main point of the posting before reading it.
1-point
penalty
Minimal subject
field
The subject field provides key word(s) only.
The reader knows the general area with which
the posting deals.
2-point
penalty
Unacceptable
subject field
The subject field provides little or no
information about the posting.
Adapted from Pelz (2004)
Student-moderated discussions can also be effective for the devel-
opment of metacognitive skills. Several approaches can be used to
ensure that this is a successful learning activity.
First, we recommend that the instructor moderate the first
online discussion in a course. This way the instructor can demon-
strate, model, and debrief about the expected requirements for a
discussion moderator.
Second, it is important to provide students with clear and
detailed instructions about their roles as moderator. Table 4.5 pro-
vides an example for the moderation of an online discussion about
a textbook chapter.
TABLE 4.5. Student-moderated discussion instructions
Criteria Description
Overview Write a discussion question from this chapter of the
textbook. Read the questions already posted, and do not
repeat a question asked by another student. Your question
should relate directly to an issue discussed in the text
and should require a thoughtful response. Don’t ask a
question that can be answered by looking up the answer in
the textbook. Attitude, opinion, and application questions
usually get thoughtful responses.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 77 13-11-21 3:58 PM

78 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
Criteria Description
Instructions Participation in a student-led discussion consists of the
following four steps:
1. Post your original question. This must be done within
the first two days the module is active. This will be your
thread – you will be the discussion leader. Your job is to
facilitate this discussion and get as much information
from the other participants as you can that relates to the
question you have asked.
2. Read the questions posted by the other students, and
respond to at least three of them. Choose the threads you
think will be the most interesting and beneficial to you.
You will be a participant in these threads.
3. Respond to every student who responds to you. Do this
in your own thread as well as the other threads in which
you are participating.
4. Continue participating in the threads until the module
is over.
Additional note If other students are not participating in your thread,
perhaps it is because your question is too complex,
confusing, or uninteresting. In this case, substitute another
question.
Adapted from Pelz (2004)
Third, in order to reflect upon and document the learning that took
place in an online discussion, we encourage student moderators to
create a summary of the discussion. In order to facilitate this pro-
cess we again recommend the use of the practical inquiry model.
Table 4.6 illustrates how this model can be used to guide the devel-
opment of these summaries and in chapter 6 we will demonstrate
how various types of technologies can be used to support this pro-
cess (e.g., wikis).
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 78 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 4. Direct Instruction 79
TABLE 4.6. Practical inquiry model for online discussion summaries
Phase Key Questions
Triggering events What were the key questions or issues identified in
the discussion?
Exploration What opportunities and challenges were discussed?
Integration What recommendations and conclusions can you
draw from the discussion?
Resolution/application How can we apply the lessons learned from this
discussion to our course assignments and future
career plans?
Key resources What can we use to find further information and
ideas about this topic (e.g., websites, articles, books)?
conclusion
In summary, we must be vigilant that neither too much nor too little
direct instruction is present. Too much direct instruction will very
quickly discourage participation and reduce proposing new ideas
or solutions. Too little direct instruction risks moving to resolu-
tion and, like too much direction, will shut down participation and
discourse.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 79 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 80 13-11-21 3:58 PM

81 81
Assessment
If we wish to discover the truth about an educational system, we
must look into its assessment procedures. (Rowntree, 1977, p. 1)
introduction
The term assessment in higher education often conjures up dif-
ferent sentiments and emotions. From an instructor perspective,
Ramsden (2003) states that assessment involves “getting to know
our students and the quality of their learning” (p.180). Conversely,
students in a recent study were asked to use one word to describe
their perceptions of assessment (Vaughan, 2010b). The four most
common words were: fear, stress, anxiety, and judgment. This dis-
connect between instructor and student perceptions regarding
assessment is a serious issue, especially since a number of educa-
tional researchers have clearly linked student approaches to learning
with the design and associated feedback of an assessment activity
5
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 81 13-11-21 3:58 PM

82 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
(Biggs, 1998; Hedberg & Corrent-Agostinho, 1999; Marton & Saljo,
1984: Ramsden, 2003; Thistlethwaite, 2006). For example, stan-
dardized tests with minimal feedback can lead to memorization
and a surface approach to learning, while collaborative group proj-
ects can encourage dialogue, richer forms of feedback, and deeper
modes of learning (Entwistle, 2000). The purpose of this chapter
is to demonstrate how the Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework
can be applied to blended learning environments in order to create
meaningful assessment activities for students in higher education.
principles of assessment
Over time, there has been an increased emphasis on formative
assessment practices (Gorsky, Caspi, & Trumper, 2006; Gibbs &
Simpson 2004, Gibbs, 2006; and American Association of Higher
Education and Accreditation, 1996). Pask’s (1976) Conversation
Theory of Learning suggests that learning takes place through our
intrapersonal (inner voice) and interpersonal (external voice with
others) conversations and that formative assessment practices help
to shape and regulate this dialogue in higher education courses.
Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick (2006) have developed the following
seven principles of good assessment feedback based on the work
of Pask:
Good feedback:
1. helps to clarify what good performance is (goals, criteria,
standards)
2. facilitates the development of self-assessment and
reflection in learning
3. delivers high quality information to students about their
learning
4. encourages teacher and peer dialogue around learning
5. encourages positive motivational beliefs and self-esteem
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 82 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 5. Assessment 83
6. provides opportunities to close the gap between current
and desired performance
7. provides information to instructors that can be used to
help shape teaching
These assessment principles clearly align with the concept of an
educational community of inquiry, which is “composed of a group
of individuals who collaboratively engage in purposeful critical dis-
course and reflection to construct personal meaning and confirm
mutual understanding” (Garrison, 2011, p. 15). When such a com-
munity takes place in a blended learning environment there are a
variety of opportunities for self-, peer-, and instructor-assessment
feedback.
self-assessment
Alverno College (2006) defines self-assessment feedback as “the
ability of students to observe, analyze, and judge their own per-
formances on the basis of criteria and to determine how they can
improve” (p.1). Akyol and Garrison (2011a) have recently demon-
strated how this notion of self-regulated learning or metacognition
“in a community of inquiry is a collaborative process where internal
and external conditions are being constantly assessed” (p. 184). In
addition, they have described three dimensions of metacognition,
which involve the knowledge, monitoring, and regulation of cogni-
tion. The knowledge of cognition refers to awareness of self as a
learner and includes entering knowledge and motivation associated
with the inquiry process, academic discipline, and expectancies.
The monitoring of cognition dimension implies the awareness and
willingness to reflect upon the learning process. And, the regulation
of metacognition focuses on the action dimension of the learning
experience, which involves the employment of strategies to achieve
meaningful learning outcomes.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 83 13-11-21 3:58 PM

84 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
Self-assessment activities that utilize rubrics and online jour-
nals can be used to support this metacognitive process in a blended
learning environment.
rubrics
The Teaching, Learning, and Technology (tlt ) Group (2011) define
rubric as “an explicit set of criteria used for assessing a particular
type of work or performance. A rubric usually also includes levels
of potential achievement for each criterion, and sometimes also
includes work or performance samples that typify each of those
levels” (n.p.). In a blended community of inquiry, rubrics can be
useful for clarifying assignment and assessment expectations
only when students are actively involved in their co-construction.
Students in a pre-service teacher education course indicated that
without student involvement rubrics “can become simple check-
lists, a way to make sure that you’ve covered everything the teacher
wants for the assignment rather than what you really wanted to do
and learn” (Vaughan, 2010b, p. 11). Unfortunately, this comment
suggests that without student involvement rubrics have the poten-
tial to support a surface rather than a deep approach to learning.
Several types of digital technologies can be used to sup-
port the co-construction of assessment rubrics in a community
of inquiry. These include applications such as Rubistar (http://
rubistar.4teachers.org/index.php), Teachnology (http://www.teach-
nology.com/web_tools/rubrics/), and Google Drive (https://drive.
google.com/). An example of a co-constructed assessment rubric
for a lesson plan assignment is illustrated in Figure 5.1.
In addition, students should be provided with the opportu-
nity to practice applying the co-constructed rubric to student work
completed in previous course sections, and in order to take owner-
ship for the rubric they should be provided with the ability to add
one unique grading component or criteria (e.g., creativity).
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 84 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 5. Assessment 85
FIGURE 5.1. Co-constructed assessment rubric for a lesson plan
assignment (http://tinyurl.com/lessonplanrubric)
Digital technologies can be also be used in a blended environment to
provide a variety of options for students to assess themselves. For
example, students can use Audacity (http://audacity.sourceforge.
net/), an open-source audio tool, to create self-assessment narra-
tions of how they achieved the various learning outcomes outlined
in the rubric. The use of self-assessment audio feedback can be a
powerful way for students to internalize their learning (Ice, Curtis,
Phillips, & Wells, 2007).
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 85 13-11-21 3:58 PM

86 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
online journals
Students in professional programs such as teacher education and
nursing are often required to maintain either a course or program
journal. Online blogging tools such as WordPress (http://word-
press.org/) and Google’s Blogger (www.blogger.com/) are commonly
being used to support this type of self-assessment activity. Figure
5.2 provides an example of a student’s online journal posting about
a lesson plan assignment.
FIGURE 5.2. Example of an online journal posting with guiding questions
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 86 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 5. Assessment 87
Students in a teacher education program suggested that online jour-
nals can be useful for self-reflection but, as one wrote, too often
they can become a “boring and repetitive activity when I am simply
being asked to reply to a set of teacher directed questions. Usually, I
just post what I think the teacher wants to hear not what I’m really
thinking” (Vaughan, 2010b, p. 12). Again, without student involve-
ment, this type of self-assessment activity can reinforce a surface
rather than a deep approach to learning.
In a blended community of inquiry, students should be provided
with a high degree of control over their online journal postings in
order for them to discuss and develop their own metacognitive
strategies. This can be achieved by designing online journal assign-
ments focused on process-orientated postings that lead to a final
product such as an end of the semester self-reflection paper. This
paper can then be assessed by the instructor using a rubric that has
been co-constructed with the students in a digital format such as
Google Drive.
peer assessment
The Foundation Coalition (2002) indicates, “Peer assessment allows
students to assess other students (their peers) in a course. Peer
assessment can also provide data that might be used in assigning
individual grades for team assignments” (p. 1). The French moralist
and essayist Joubert (1842) is attributed with the quote: “To teach is
to learn twice,” and in an effective community of inquiry all partici-
pants are both learners and teachers. The term teaching presence,
rather than teacher presence, implies that everyone in the commu-
nity is responsible for providing input on the design, facilitation,
and direction of the teaching process.
In a blended community of inquiry, one of the biggest challenges
of peer assessment activities can be finding a convenient place and
time for all students to meet outside of the classroom. Digital tech-
nologies can be used to overcome this barrier, beginning with the
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 87 13-11-21 3:58 PM

88 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
group areas in learning management systems such as Blackboard.
These group areas can be used to communicate and share docu-
ments about the peer assessment process for individual and group
projects. They usually consist of asynchronous (e.g., e-mail and dis-
cussion board) and synchronous (e.g., chat) communication tools,
along with a file exchange function.
Collaborative writing tools such as Google Drive can also be
used to provide meaningful peer review feedback on written assign-
ments (Figure 5.3). This application allows students to control who
has commenting and editing privileges for their documents.
FIGURE 5.3. Example peer review comments for a writing assignment in
Google Drive
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 88 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 5. Assessment 89
In addition, online journal applications such as Blogger can be used
to provide peer review feedback on individual project work (Figure
5.4).
FIGURE 5.4. Peer review of individual project work using Google's Blogger
application
Additionally, wiki tools such as Wikispaces can be used to co-create
and critique online discussion summaries (Figure 5.5). The history
files of a wiki summary clearly demonstrate the contribution and
critique that was made by each member of the group.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 89 13-11-21 3:58 PM

90 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
FIGURE 5.5. Group online discussion summary and critique in Wikispaces
Digital tools such as the University of California at Los Angeles’
Calibrated Peer Review (cpr) (http://cpr.molsci.ucla.edu/) have also
been developed to help students learn how to provide constructive
feedback to their peers in a community of inquiry.
Within classroom settings, personal response systems (e.g.,
clickers) can be used to support a form of peer instruction (Crouch
& Mazur, 2001). The process begins with the teacher posing a ques-
tion or problem. The students initially work individually toward
a solution and vote on what they believe is the correct answer by
selecting the desired numbered or lettered response on their clicker.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 90 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 5. Assessment 91
The results are then projected for the entire class to view. For a
good question, there is usually a broad range of responses. Students
are then required to compare and discuss their solutions with the
person next to them in the classroom in order to come to a con-
sensus. Another vote is taken but this time only one response or
clicker per group can be utilized. In most circumstances, the range
of responses decreases and usually centers on the correct answer. As
an alternative to this process in a community of inquiry, the instruc-
tor can provide groups of students with opportunities to generate
the quiz questions in advance of the classroom session.
While digital technologies can provide students with increased
flexibility and communication opportunities to complete peer
assessment activities, outside of the classroom several additional
concerns have been expressed. First, students often lack previous
experience with peer assessment; they strongly recommend that in
a community of inquiry instructors should “provide guidance and a
class orientation on how to give each other meaningful feedback and
that there should be opportunities for both written and oral peer
feedback” (Vaughan, 2010b, p. 18). In a blended learning environ-
ment, these students also suggest that instructors should “provide
class time to begin and conclude peer assessment activities in order
to build trust and accountability for the peer assessment process”
(Vaughan, 2010b, p. 19).
instructor assessment
Instructor assessment practices in higher education are often limited
to high-stakes summative assessment activities such as midterm
and final examinations (Boud, 2000). The role of an instructor in a
community of inquiry is to provide ongoing and meaningful assess-
ment feedback in order to help students develop the necessary
metacognitive skills and strategies to take responsibility for their
own learning.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 91 13-11-21 3:58 PM

92 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
In a blended environment, an instructor can use a variety of
digital technologies to provide diagnostic, formative, and summa-
tive assessment to students in a community of inquiry. For example,
instructors can use collaborative writing tools to provide formative
assessment feedback at checkpoints or milestones for individual or
group projects (Figure 5.6). This allows students to receive instruc-
tor feedback throughout the process of constructing the project
rather than just focusing on summative assessment feedback for
the final product.
FIGURE 5.6. Example of using Google Drive to provide instructor formative
assessment feedback comments
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 92 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 5. Assessment 93
Instructors in a blended community of inquiry are also encouraged
to take a portfolio approach to assessment. This involves students
receiving a second chance or opportunity for summative assess-
ment on their course assignments. For example, students initially
submit and receive instructor assessment for each of the required
course assignments. Throughout the semester, students then have
the opportunity to revise these assignments based on the initial
instructor feedback and to post them to their course or program
portfolios for final summative assessment by the instructor. A
range of e-Portfolio tools can support this process, ranging from the
LiveText commercial application (https://www.livetext.com/) to the
free Google Sites tool (http://sites.google.com/).
In addition, digital technologies can be used to support external
expert assessment opportunities. For example, students can pub-
lically share critiques of academic articles by using blogging tools
such as WordPress and Blogger. The authors of these articles can
then be invited to post comments about these critiques to the stu-
dents’ blogs. Blogging applications will be described in more detail
in chapter 6.
External experts can also provide assessment feedback on
individual or group presentations through the use of web-based
video technologies. These types of presentations can be video
recorded and either streamed live (e.g., Livestream at http://www.
livestream.com/) or posted to a video-sharing site such as YouTube
(http://www.youtube.com/). The external experts can then provide
assessment feedback in either synchronous (e.g., real-time audio)
or asynchronous formats (e.g., online discussion forums) to the
students.
In terms of strategies, students in the teacher education program
study suggested that instructors should “focus on providing students
with ongoing formative assessment feedback rather than on just
summative midterm and final examination comments” (Vaughan,
2010b, p. 22). They also recommended that instructors should strive
to “provide oral feedback in addition to their written assessment
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 93 13-11-21 3:58 PM

94 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
feedback. For example, instructors could request that students meet
with them during office hour sessions to orally debrief about assign-
ments” (Vaughan, 2010b, p. 22). Finally, these students emphasized,
“Let us provide instructors with more feedback on their assignments
and teaching practice throughout the semester, not just at the end –
assessment should be a two-way conversation between students and
instructors” (Vaughan, 2010b, p. 22).
conclusion
Self, peer, and instructor assessment should be an integrated process
in a blended community of inquiry, rather than a series of isolated
events, in order to help students develop their own metacognitive
skills and strategies. For example, a student in the teacher education
study commented, “I used the self-reflection for checking my work
and making sure I had everything I needed. I used peer review for a
different perspective on my work, and I used instructor feedback to
understand how I could improve my work” (Vaughan, 2010b, p. 23).
Another student in the same study stated, “Self-reflection showed
me what I liked about my work and what needed to be improved,
peer feedback gave comments on what could be done better and
then instructor feedback gave ideas on how the assignment could be
fixed up to get a better mark” (Vaughan, 2010b, p. 23).
In addition, these students stressed how a blended Community
of Inquiry framework supported by digital technologies helped them
integrate these three forms of assessment into a triad approach
(Figure 5.7).
This triad-approach involves students using rubrics, blogs, and
online quizzes to provide themselves with self-reflection and feed-
back on their course assignments. They can then receive further peer
feedback on their course work via the use of digital technologies
such wikis, clickers, and other peer review tools. Finally, instructors
and in some cases external experts can review students’ ePortfolios
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 94 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 5. Assessment 95
and use digital video technologies to observe student performance,
diagnose student misconceptions, and provide additional assess-
ment feedback.
FIGURE 5.7. Using digital technologies to support a triad approach to
assessement in a blended community of inquiry
An international call for a greater focus on assessment for learning,
rather than on assessment for just measurement and accountabil-
ity of student performance, is well documented in the educational
research literature (Yeh, 2009). The use of digital technologies to
support student assessment in a blended community of inquiry
may lead to Hattie’s (2009) vision of a visible teaching and learning
framework where “teachers SEE learning through the eyes of their
students and students SEE themselves as their own teachers” (p. 238).
Instructor/External Expert
Self-Reection
Peer Feedback
Blogs
Peer review tools Portfolios
ClickersWikis
Online quizzes
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 95 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 96 13-11-21 3:58 PM

97 97
Technology
When I see the power that technology gives us in terms of the new
ways of collaborating and sharing, and the quality of the resources
that people are sharing, I think it’s just changing everything. (Tinney,
2013)
introduction
The purpose of this chapter is to describe how digital technolo-
gies and educational strategies can be used to design, facilitate, and
direct collaborative communities of inquiry. We begin this chapter
with an overview of collaborative learning, followed by descriptions
of how various types of technologies can be used to design, facili-
tate, and direct a blended learning environment in higher education.
Sustained collaboration in the construction and confirmation
of knowledge represents a new era in educational practice. The New
Media Consortium and the educause Learning Initiative’s 2010
6
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 97 13-11-21 3:58 PM

98 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
Horizon Report (Johnson, Levine, Smith, & Stone, 2010) identifies
how the “work of students is increasingly seen as collaborative by
nature . . . the emergence of a raft of new (and often free) tools has
made collaboration easier than at any other point in history” (p. 4).
They identify collaboration and communication as a significant
trend in expanding the possibilities for learning and creativity. A
significant driver of this transformation in learning has been the
emergence of social media technologies.
These technologies present exciting opportunities, but the
challenge is in understanding the educational design and pedagogi-
cal issues associated with the best use of social media tools such
as blogs, wikis, online communities and synchronous communica-
tion technologies (e.g., Adobe Connect). The true potential of these
tools is in the design, facilitation, and direction of synchronous
and asynchronous communities of inquiry that support worthwhile
educational goals and higher-order learning activities.
We believe that all of education is experiencing a transformative
shift from issues of accessing and sharing information to designing
communities of inquiry where participants are actively engaged in
deep and meaningful learning. Social media applications are about
using the Web in a way that capitalizes on its greatest asset: bring-
ing people together in learning communities where participants
(students and teachers in the case of education) with a common
interest can interact and collaborate on purposeful activities. Brown
and Adler (2008) argue that the capabilities of social media tools
have “shifted attention from access to information toward access to
people” (p. 18). These applications allow people to come together in
collaborative learning communities.
An educational community of inquiry is a group of individu-
als who collaboratively engage in purposeful critical discourse
and reflection to construct personal meaning and confirm mutual
understanding (Garrison, 2011). Historically, this has been the ideal
of learning environments in higher education. Only in the last half-
century, with the growth of enrolment in higher education, has the
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 98 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 6. Technology 99
practice been diminished as a result of larger classes and passive
lectures. As social media tools continue to emerge and evolve, edu-
cators are presented with the opportunity to realize the historical
ideal of higher education to learn in collaborative communities of
inquiry.
collaboration
Social media applications have the potential to support collabora-
tive learning activities. In order to achieve this objective we must
first step back and rethink what we are doing. What are the core
values of an educational experience and how can we align our assess-
ment activities and learning outcomes with the need for creative
and innovative graduates that can work productively in collabora-
tive environments? To help address these challenges, educators are
increasingly coming to understand that we must provide more inter-
active and engaged learning experiences (Barkley, 2009; Kuh, Kinzie,
Scuh, Whitt, & Associates, 2005). The key to engaging learners in
deep and meaningful learning is through collaborative communi-
ties of inquiry – not the passive lecture approach that currently
dominates higher education. As mentioned previously, engagement
in collaborative discourse and reflection has historically been the
hallmark of higher education. Social media tools can be used as a
catalyst to redesign our blended courses for more active and col-
laborative learning experiences. Our first lesson is to avoid simply
layering these digital tools onto a deficient educational design (e.g.,
information transfer model, which only focuses on the presentation
and organization of content).
Collaborative communities of inquiry are characterized by shar-
ing personal meaning and the validation of understanding through
discourse (Garrison, 2011). Philosophically, this approach to learning
is founded in the tradition of social-constructivist learning theory.
Students are expected to assume the individual responsibility to
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 99 13-11-21 3:58 PM

100 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
make sense of new concepts and ideas but with the support and
feedback of a collaborative community of peers and mentors. Inquiry
is at the core of a collaborative learning experience. A wide range
of social media applications is available to support a collaborative
inquiry approach to learning in a blended course.
social media applications and educational
strategies
Tim O’Reilly (2005) is credited with coining the term Web 2.0 to
describe the trend in the use of Web technology and design that
aims to enhance creativity, information sharing, and, most notably,
collaboration among users. Recently, this concept has been defined
as social media: “a group of Internet-based applications that build on
the ideological and technological foundations of Web 2.0” (Kaplan
& Haenlein, 2010, p. 60). These applications can be used to support
collaborative learning in a variety of formats. For example, social
bookmarking applications can be used to share personal collections
of Web-based resources to complete group projects. Blogs can facil-
itate student self-reflection and peer review of course assignments.
Students can use wikis to summarize course discussions collab-
oratively, refine research papers, or even co-create online books.
Social networking systems (sns) such as Facebook and LinkedIn
can be used to extend the boundaries of the classroom to create
online communities and discussions and debates that include past
students, potential employers, and subject matter experts. Audio,
graphic, and video files can now be created and shared through social
content applications such as PodOmatic, Flikr, and YouTube. These
files and other data sources can then be recombined to create new
meaning and interpretations by using mashup applications such as
Intel’s Mash Maker and Yahoo Pipes. Synchronous communication
technologies such as Skype and Adobe Connect allow students to
communicate and collaborate outside of the classroom in real time.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 100 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 6. Technology 101
Moreover, virtual world applications such as Second Life provide
opportunities for rich synchronous interaction in 3-D immersive
worlds to support collaborative and creative project-based work.
We will now examine how the following eight categories of
social media applications can be used to design, facilitate, and direct
collaborative learning activities in blended courses and programs.
1. social bookmarking
2. blogs
3. wikis
4. social networking
5. social content
6. mashups
7. synchronous communication and conferencing
8. virtual worlds
Additional examples of social media applications and ideas for col-
laborative learning activities are provided on a corresponding wiki
site (http://tinyurl.com/collaborativecommunity).
social bookmarking
The general idea behind social bookmarking is that, rather than
saving a bookmark for a Web page in a browser such as Internet
Explorer or Firefox, users instead save the bookmark to a publicly
accessible website (e.g., delicious.com). Other people can then
see the bookmark and, ideally, be exposed to something that they
wouldn’t otherwise encounter. In addition, some social bookmark-
ing sites also employ a voting system that allows users to indicate
what bookmarks they found interesting (e.g., reddit.com). As a book-
mark receives more and more votes, its prominence on the website
increases, which in turn attracts more and more votes. The ultimate
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 101 13-11-21 3:58 PM

102 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
goal is to have the bookmark appear on the home page of the social
bookmarking site.
This ability to share and build upon the resources of others
can help to develop relationships between concepts and people in
a higher education course or program. Social bookmarking appli-
cations can be used for student-generated course reading lists,
debates, individual, and group projects.
course reading lists and assignments
For example, rather than having a predetermined reading list, at
the beginning of each semester, an instructor could assign stu-
dent groups to find resources related to specific course concepts or
issues. These resources can then be shared and annotated by using a
social bookmarking tool such as diigo.com (Figure 6.1).
These resources can also be used for pre-class reading assign-
ments. Traditionally, this activity involved a reading from the course
textbook. Social bookmarking systems such as citeULike and Edtags
can now be used to provide students with access to relevant and
engaging Web-based articles and resources.
Despite the ability to access relevant learning material easily,
the common challenge still exists of getting students to engage
meaningfully in pre-class activities. Novak, Patterson, Gavrin, and
Christian (1999) have used a survey or quiz tool to create triggering
events for students in advance of a synchronous session. They have
coined the term Just-in-Time Teaching (JiTT) to describe the process
of getting students to read a Web-based article and then respond
to an online survey or quiz, shortly before a class. The instructor
then reviews the student submissions “just-in-time” to adjust the
subsequent class session in order to address the students’ needs,
identified by the survey or quiz results. A typical survey or quiz
consists of four concept-based questions with the final question
asking students: “What did you not understand about the required
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 102 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 6. Technology 103
reading and what would you like me [the instructor] to focus on
within the next synchronous session?”
FIGURE 6.1. Co-constructed course reading list in Diigo
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 103 13-11-21 3:58 PM

104 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
debates
Educational research has demonstrated that in-class and online
debates are an effective way to engage students in deeper approaches
to learning (Kanuka, 2005). Students can use a social bookmark-
ing application such as Social Bookmarking to collect and annotate
resources for debate activities.
For example, in a blended course, student teams could be
assigned to collect a series of resources that support a particular
position or ideology, outside of class time. During class, students
can then be asked to take the opposite side of the debate and use
the resources collected by the other student teams to prepare their
arguments.
individual and group projects
Social bookmarking systems such as Delicious enable students
to create their own personal libraries, which they can then share
with their colleagues. The advantage of using such a service is that
students are continually able to build and share their resource col-
lections throughout their university experiences. This allows the
students to make intentional connections between projects and
assignments that they complete in different courses.
blogs
A blog is a Web-based personal journal with reflections, comments,
and, often, hyperlinks to other blogs that the author of the site visits
on a regular basis (Downes, 2004). People can subscribe to blogs by
using a Really Simple Syndication (rss) feed to receive automated
content updates. Blogging can provide students with opportunities
to receive external feedback and to make contributions to the dia-
logues in their fields of study. In blended learning courses, blogs
can be used to support self-reflection and peer review of course
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 104 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 6. Technology 105
assignments, allowing students to take a deeper approach to their
learning by going public with their work (Vaughan, 2008).
self-reflection
At the beginning of the semester, an instructor can require each
student to create a blog using applications such as Blogger and
WordPress. Students can use these blogs to document their learning
growth and development throughout the term. For example, during
the first week of classes students post an initial journal entry about
their personal learning goals for the course and what they think
they already know about the course concepts. Then at the end of
the course, students create a final journal entry that reflects on what
they have learned and how they have changed, grown, and developed
throughout the course.
Blogs can also be used to get students to self-reflect about
their course assignments. The purpose of these entries is to have
students intentionally reflect about what they learned through the
process of completing the assessment activity and how they could
apply this learning to their future course studies or careers. The fol-
lowing questions can be used to guide this activity:
1. What did you learn in the process of completing this
assignment?
2. How will you apply what you learned from this
assignment to the next class assignment, other courses,
and/or your career?
peer review
A peer review process can also be supported through the use of
blogs. Students can post drafts of course assignments to their blogs
and then their peers can review these documents and post com-
ments to the author’s blog (Figure 6.2).
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 105 13-11-21 3:58 PM

106 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
Guiding questions for this peer review process could include:
1. What did you learn from reviewing this document?
2. What were the strengths (e.g., content, writing style,
format, and structure) of the document?
3. What constructive advice and/or recommendations could
you provide for improving the quality of this document?
wikis
A wiki is a collection of web pages that can be edited by anyone, at
any time, from anywhere. The possibilities for using wikis as a plat-
form for collaborative projects are limited only by one’s imagination
and time (Leuf & Cunningham, 2001). In blended learning courses
students can use wikis collaboratively to create course notes, online
discussion summaries, group essays, and even course textbooks.
course notes
Many students in higher education are now bringing laptop com-
puters to class, and wiki applications such as Google Drive and
TitanPad can be used to co-construct a set of course notes. This can
either be an individual activity or the instructor can assign student
teams the task of creating notes for specific class periods.
The advantage of using an application such as TitanPad is that
students can work simultaneously on the same document without
overwriting each other’s work. Students can also assign a specific
text colour to their wiki contributions in order to keep track of their
own work.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 106 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 6. Technology 107
FIGURE 6.2. Peer review of a blog posting of an article critique
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 107 13-11-21 3:58 PM

108 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
online discussion summaries
Student-moderated online discussion forums can be used to pro-
mote individual reflection and critical dialogue between face-to-face
sessions in a blended learning course. For example, at the beginning
of the semester, groups of students (three to five) can self-select
a topic that is related to key course concepts and/or issues. Each
group is responsible for moderating and summarizing their selected
online discussion for a set period of time (often one or two weeks).
Students can use Garrison, Anderson, and Archer’s (2001) practical
inquiry model as a guide to create reflective discussion summaries.
For example:
1. Triggering events – What were the key questions
identified this week?
2. Exploration – What opportunities and challenges were
discussed?
3. Integration – What recommendations and conclusions
can you draw from the discussion?
4. Resolution/application – How can we apply the “lessons
learned” from this discussion to our course assignments
and future career plans?
5. Key resources (e.g., websites, articles, books) that we could
use to find further information and ideas about this topic?
A wiki can then be used to draft notes and a final summary (synthe-
sis and analysis) of the online discussion based on these questions
or additional guidelines that are co-created by the students and the
course teacher (see Figure 6.3).
Wikis can provide a collaborative workspace for students to
construct group essays. The advantage of using an application such
as Google Drive is that students can access these group documents
from any computer or mobile device with Internet access.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 108 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 6. Technology 109
FIGURE 6.3. Wiki online discussion summary
Students can easily edit and revise each other’s work without soft-
ware or computer platform compatibility issues (e.g., Mac versus
PC). The finished product can then be exported in a variety of
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 109 13-11-21 3:58 PM

110 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
formats (e.g., PDF, Word, and html) and submitted for either peer or
instructor assessment.
course wiki textbooks
The potential also exists for students to use wikis to co-create
course textbooks. There are numerous examples of such textbooks
on the Wikibooks site. Wiki textbooks can be created and developed
in a variety of ways. For example, student groups can be assigned to
develop new chapters of the book while other groups can be given
the task to peer review and edit existing book chapters.
social networking
Social networking systems (sns) allow users to share ideas, activi-
ties, events, and interests within their own individual networks.
This can lead to the development of online communities of people
who share common interests and activities. In blended learning
courses, applications such as Facebook and LinkedIn can be used for
study groups and online discussion board activities.
study groups
A number of educational research studies have been conducted
over the years that have clearly demonstrated that, regardless of
the subject matter, students working in small groups tend to learn
more of what is taught and retain it longer than when the same con-
tent is presented in other instructional formats (Beckman, 1990;
Chickering & Gamson, 1991; Johnson, Johnson, & Smith, 1991;
McKeachie, Pintrich, Lin, & Smith, 1986). Many of the students in
higher education today commute to campus and are therefore chal-
lenged to find the time and the location to work in study groups
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 110 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 6. Technology 111
outside of class time. Recent studies by the educause Applied
Centre for Research (Smith, Salaway & Borreson Caruso, 2010) and
the Pew Internet & American Life Project (Lenhart, Purcell, Smith &
Zickuhr, 2010) have indicated that Facebook is currently the most
popular social networking system in higher education and that a
number of students have begun using this application to support
virtual study groups.
The study group application in Facebook allows students to post
messages, conduct discussions, and exchange files. The advantage
of using these group areas is that students can support each other,
academically and socially, outside of class time. The downside of
using Facebook is that this application is designed to promote social
interaction rather than to create a learning space.
online discussion board
As mentioned previously, online discussion forums can be used
as a powerful catalyst to promote individual reflection and criti-
cal dialogue, outside of class time. Often, institutional learning
management systems (lms) such as Blackboard are used to support
these discussions. These institutional applications often present
collaborative challenges as it can be difficult to have external guests
participate in the discussions (e.g., have to get an it administrator
to enrol guests in the lms) and to provide students with moderator
(e.g., instructor) status. Social networking tools such as Facebook
and LinkedIn can be used to overcome these issues by creating a
course group space (Figure 6.4).
The membership of groups in Facebook can be open or con-
trolled by the moderator (e.g., course instructor). Anyone who has
a Facebook account can be invited to become a member and par-
ticipate in the online discussions. This could include past student
members of the course (e.g., alumni), external experts, and even par-
ents. Any member of the group can moderate the group discussion
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 111 13-11-21 3:58 PM

112 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
forums, and when a posting is made to the discussion, the person’s
Facebook profile image also appears, helping to create a more imme-
diate sense of community.
FIGURE 6.4. Student moderated online discussion forum in Facebook
social content
Social content tools allow for the creation and exchange of user-
generated content (e.g., text, audio, images, and video). Applications
such as YouTube, Flikr, SlideShare, and PodOmatic provide a wealth
of reusable media resources for learners and educators. These
resources can be used to support pre-class activities, course learn-
ing objects, individual presentations, and group workshops.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 112 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 6. Technology 113
pre-class activities
Teachers and students can both use social content tools to create,
post, and share digital learning objects before a class session. For
example, teachers can use podcasts (e.g., PodOmatic), narrated MS
PowerPoint presentations (e.g., SlideShare, Adobe Presenter) or
video (e.g., YouTube) to communicate course concepts, scenarios,
and case studies with students before class time. The advantages
of using these types of learning objects are that they allow students
to listen and view course-related material outside of class time, at
their own pace, and as often as required to gain understanding (see
Figure 6.5).
FIGURE 6.5. Narrated mathematical problem solving exercise
learning objects
Students can also use social content applications to create learn-
ing objects to describe and explain threshold course concepts. For
example, individuals or groups of students can be assigned the task
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 113 13-11-21 3:58 PM

114 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
of creating images, short podcasts, or YouTube video clips about key
terms, definitions, or concepts related to the course. These resources
can then be posted to the course website or linked to a learning
object repository such as the Multimedia Educational Resource for
Learning and Online Teaching (merlot) site (http://www.merlot.
org/merlot/index.htm). The learning objects linked to merlot are
categorized by discipline, and many of these objects have also been
peer-reviewed by user communities with suggestions on how to use
these digital resources in course assignments.
individual presentations and group workshops
Individual presentations and group workshops are often an essen-
tial part of a blended learning course. Unfortunately, these activities
often focus on information dissemination (e.g., lecturing) rather
than on discussion, and they can also consume a tremendous
amount of precious class time. In order to avoid these issues, a
number of instructors have begun to require students to use various
social content tools to create narrated versions of their individual or
group presentations.
These narrated presentations can then be posted or linked to an
online discussion forum where other students are required to view
and comment on them before a class or synchronous session (e.g.,
narrated PowerPoint presentations and YouTube videos). Class time
is then used to discuss and debate the questions and issues raised in
the discussion forum about the presentations.
mashups
Mashup tools allow nontechnical users to mix or “mash” different
types of data in order to discover new meanings or simply to pres-
ent information in an unconventional format. For example, music
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 114 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 6. Technology 115
mashups consist of mixing tracks from two or more different source
songs. Mashup applications can be used for mapping and data visu-
alization activities, presentation of student project and research
work, analysis of class and online discussions, as well as digital
storytelling.
analysis of class and online discussions
As mentioned previously, many students in higher education are
now bringing laptop computers and mobile devices into the class-
room. By using wiki applications such as TitanPad, these tools can
be used to take collaborative class notes. These notes can then be
copied and pasted into a mashup application such as Wordle in order
to create “word clouds” (Figure 6.6).
FIGURE 6.6. Class brainstorm results displayed in Wordle
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 115 13-11-21 3:58 PM

116 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
Word clouds can be very useful for helping students identify key
themes related to course concepts and issues. For example, at the
beginning of a class, an instructor can ask the students to brain-
storm what they already know about a course concept in Google
Docs. The instructor copies and pastes this text into Wordle in order
to create a word cloud. Higher-frequency words and phrases are dis-
played in a different colour and larger font size. The instructor can
then facilitate a discussion about these key words and phrases and
explain how they relate to a particular course concept.
This activity can also be repeated at the end of a class period or
course module in order to demonstrate student changes in concep-
tual understanding. The instructor displays the word clouds created
at the beginning and end of a class period and then asks students to
compare and contrast the key words in an online discussion forum,
after a class session. Conversely, an instructor can create word
clouds from the discussion forum postings on a particular topic and
then display these for further debate in a classroom session.
digital storytelling
A series of mashup applications have been developed for both Mac
(e.g., GarageBand, iMovie) and PC (e.g., Photo Story, Movie Maker)
computers that allow users to combine and mix images, text, music,
and video in order to create a digital story. Students can complete
these stories individually or in groups and combine various forms
of media, allowing for multiple pathways of creativity and success.
A number of websites have been developed to help stu-
dents create their own digital stories. We highly recommend the
University of Houston’s Educational Uses of Digital Storytelling
site (http://digitalstorytelling.coe.uh.edu/) as it provides examples,
tools, tutorials, and rubrics for assessing digital stories.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 116 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 6. Technology 117
synchronous communication and conferencing
The use of synchronous communication tools (e.g., text messaging,
audio, and video) is becoming common in higher education. Some
instructors are using these applications to replace classrooms ses-
sions (e.g., online blended learning approach) while students are
using these tools to support real-time collaborative project-based
work.
synchronous classroom sessions
At many institutions, synchronous communication applications
such as Adobe Connect and Blackboard Collaborate have been inte-
grated into the learning management system (Figure 6.7).
FIGURE 6.7. A Blackboard Collaborate session
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 117 13-11-21 3:58 PM

118 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
Instructors can use these tools to create learning resources (e.g.,
record a mini-lecture, including diagrams and illustrations, in
the accompanying whiteboard), host external guest presentations
during class time, and/or replace physical classroom sessions with
virtual ones. The focus of these sessions should not be on informa-
tion transmission such as lecturing, but instead, be used to diagnose
student misconceptions, foster critical dialogue, and support peer
instruction.
student group work
Students can also use synchronous applications such as Skype and
WizIQ to communicate, collaborate, and co-construct projects and
research papers in real-time. Because many of today’s students in
higher education commute to campuses, the advantage of using
synchronous tools is that they can work together, anytime, any-
where they have a computer and a reasonable Internet connection.
Some of these tools (e.g., Blackboard Collaborate) also allow the stu-
dents to share desktop applications and to record their sessions in
case a group member is absent.
virtual worlds
Virtual world applications such as Second Life, Croquet, and The
Palace allow for synchronous interaction in 3-D immersive worlds.
These tools support collaborative and creative project-based work
that goes beyond text-based and audio communication. Many
campus-based learning activities such as lectures, tutorials, and
labs can be replicated and enhanced in a virtual world application
(Figure 6.8).
For example, students can take part in virtual role-plays, simu-
lations, and experiments. They can visit educational “islands” where
they can receive mentorship and advice from resident experts (e.g.,
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 118 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 6. Technology 119
nasa). Students can also visit foreign islands where they can learn
about different languages and cultures.
FIGURE 6.8. Students meeting for a virtual class in Second Life
future trends in technology
Predicting the future is challenging in any context and potentially
even more unproductive in terms of technology and its possible
applications. For this reason we shall focus on identifiable trends
that in the near future will most likely continue to shape educa-
tional practice significantly as it relates to blended learning.
The first and perhaps most significant trend is the adoption of
collaborative approaches to teaching and learning in higher educa-
tion. This involves much more than simply interacting and sharing
information. Collaboration involves a purposeful partnering of
students and instructors to solve relevant problems. It provides
an environment to test conceptions and validate personally con-
structed knowledge.
The second trend is the recognition that through the adop-
tion of social media applications, communities can be created and
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 119 13-11-21 3:58 PM

120 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
sustained over time and place. Brown and Adler (2008) suggest that
this will lead to “learning 2.0” environments, which go “beyond pro-
viding free access to traditional course materials and educational
tools and create a participatory architecture for supporting com-
munities of learners” (p. 28).
The third trend is the ability of social media tools to support
diverse educational purposes, approaches, and audiences. This
provides students with multiple pathways for success in blended
learning courses. While we can identify trends and even principles
of practice, the decentralization of the teaching and learning process
will inevitably lead to greater diversity and opportunities to learn.
The choice of what and how to learn can only be a plus for educators
and students.
As opportunities for interaction and collaboration increase
through the proliferation of social media technologies, more pressure
will be placed on educational institutions to adopt collaborative–
constructivist approaches that engage learners in communities
of inquiry. Collaborative learning goes beyond passively sharing
information. For this reason, social media technologies will have
a transformative influence in both formal and informal learning
environments.
conclusion
The historical ideal of higher education has been to learn in col-
laborative communities of inquiry (Lipman, 1991). This chapter has
demonstrated the potential of using social media technologies and
educational strategies to recapture this vision, even in large intro-
ductory undergraduate courses. The key is to redesign our blended
learning courses for active and collaborative learning experiences
that enable students to take responsibility for their learning and
validate their understanding through discourse and debate with
their peers.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 120 13-11-21 3:58 PM

121 121
Conclusion
We still educate our students based on an agricultural timetable, in
an industrial setting, but tell students they live in a digital age.
(US Department of Education, 2005, p. 22)
introduction
Adoption of the Community of Inquiry principles, which we have
explored in this book, is inherently transformational. They repre-
sent a new educational paradigm that will be extremely disruptive to
those higher educational institutions heavily invested in informa-
tion dissemination. The CoI paradigm represents significant change
– change that better maps onto the needs of a connected knowledge
society. It is an approach to teaching and learning that distances
itself from the traditional practices of dispensing information either
through a lecture or self-study materials. New paradigms such as
7
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 121 13-11-21 3:58 PM

122 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
the CoI framework have drawn attention as a result of enormous
information and technological advancements.
Today’s technological revolution, with its order of magni-
tude advances that have left little of common life unchanged,
presents an open challenge to the University to once again
“reinvent” itself. Indeed, it could be argued that the pressure
for change placed on the University today is greater than any
it has faced in any previous historical epoch. (Amirault &
Visser, 2009, p. 64)
The nature and rate of change in society associated with new and
emerging information and communications technology represents
an enormous adaptation challenge for education. This may be the
most significant challenge facing higher education. In particular,
this challenge is the adoption of appropriate information and com-
munications technology in the classroom. New and emerging social
media technologies are the catalyst for rethinking what we are doing
in higher education classrooms. Keeping in mind that technology is
only a means to an end (as powerful as it is), we must be clear about
our educational goals.
We have argued that blended learning in a community of inquiry
context provides a coherent way forward that can capitalize on the
structural changes in society. Blended learning provides a thought-
ful adoption of communications technologies that can address the
challenges of providing more engaged learning experiences in higher
education. Once we understand how best to integrate technology
in the form of blended learning, we must understand how to lead
and manage this inevitable transformation. The key is to guide this
inevitable change with awareness and purpose. How we will imple-
ment these technologies and define our educational goals must be a
collaborative effort.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 122 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 7. Conclusion 123
collaborative leadership
Education by its inherent nature is a purposeful and collabora-
tive enterprise. This has been made clear in the previous chapters.
However, the interdependency of the educational community is not
often recognized or practiced when it comes to leadership. One of
the great deficiencies of the higher education system is the lack of
substantive collaboration in establishing a vision, developing stra-
tegic action plans and, most importantly, implementing these plans
in a sustainable manner. Collaborative leadership instils common
purpose, trust, and identification with the institution. These are the
principles associated with a community of inquiry that are relevant
to higher education leadership. Planning for open communication
and reflective discourse, establishing community and purposeful
inquiry, and ensuring meaningful resolutions and applications form
the template for collaborative leadership. This goes well beyond
charisma and public persona. It means working hard behind the
scenes to bring people together focused on meaningful change.
Higher educational institutions generally have not shown a
commitment to change that is inevitably disruptive. While infor-
mation and communications technologies (ict) are being adopted
in the classroom, educational leaders have not yet grasped the full
significance of the impending changes. A vision must be informed
by the appropriate set of principles. Unfortunately, most leaders
are not prepared to spend the commensurate time understand-
ing the paradigmatic shift that is upon us, particularly with regard
to undergraduate education. We have to ask: To what extent does
senior leadership understand engaged inquiry approaches to learn-
ing and the impact of information and communications technology
in realizing the ideals of higher education? It is to this point that we
raise the issue of collaborative leadership required to bring higher
education into the connected knowledge age.
Too often leaders hold to views about teaching and learning that
are simply at odds with technological developments in the larger
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 123 13-11-21 3:58 PM

124 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
society. Current classroom practices are not sustainable. Leaders
must focus more of their attention on matters of teaching and learn-
ing and engage in a collaborative, open, and sustained commitment
to create active learning communities using the same principles
that are the foundation of a CoI. The change that we have described
and discussed involves significant technological change but this is
simply a means to an end. The real argument is to what purpose is
the change directed.
To date, the focus has been on the adoption of technology for
administrative services. This investment has failed to reach the
classroom in any appreciable manner. Senior administrators do not
fully appreciate the effect technology is having on learning and the
need to reshape what we do in the classroom. This is not a direct
criticism of leadership. Understanding collaborative approaches as
reflected in a community of inquiry combined with the complex
possibilities of a blended learning design is an enormous demand
on senior leadership. However, leaders must be prepared to ques-
tion conventional classroom practices and to become engaged in
and committed to the transformation of approaches to teaching and
learning in a digital society. Senior administrators must be partici-
pants in digital designs for creating and sustaining communities of
inquiry. The challenge is to understand their role.
Collaborative leadership is neither top-down nor bottom-up. It
is the fusion of both, just as collaborative constructivist approaches
to learning are the fusion of sage on the stage and guide on the side.
Collaborative leadership is the rejection of such dualisms and the
creation of a unified purpose and effort. Leaders must display char-
acteristics that reflect openness and courage. The lessons of the
past have shown us that leadership too often succumbs to insecurity
and surrounds itself with sycophants. Its other failing is in avoid-
ing the need for fundamental change and embellishing insignificant
change through extensive public relations initiatives that choose
rhetoric over reality. Vision and insight are developed through a
deep understanding of the organization and its challenges, and most
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 124 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Chapter 7. Conclusion 125
importantly, they must be informed through sustained collabora-
tion. When vision and courage intersect, real commitment and
actual change result.
Leadership also requires sustained commitment and honest
feedback. Commitment to assessment and appropriate adjustments
over time are at the heart of real change. This means honest and
relevant feedback with regard to the strategic vision. It means a
critical focus on the progress being made to achieve the strategic
vision and actions that can improve outcomes. Inevitably there will
be different values and interests that can only be resolved through
dialogue. Only through sustained collaborative action over a signifi-
cant period of time will institutional change be realized.
The kind of change that we have addressed in this book is trans-
formational. It is fair to say that there is a lack of strategic focus
and commitment with regard to the need to transform teaching and
learning. It has been argued that much of this can be attributed to
what Ginsberg (2011) refers to as the “all-administrative univer-
sity” (p.197) and how it has grown and isolated the leaders from
the purpose of higher education: the learning experience. Higher
education requires transformed classroom approaches and organi-
zational structures to initiate and sustain these changes. If there is
to be an efficient paradigm shift, resources will have to be shifted
from administrative purposes to changes in the classroom. There
is growing evidence that the leadership and structure of successful
higher educational institutions will need to be transformed if they
are to realize the full potential of blended learning in a collaborative
constructivist paradigm. The key to the transformation of teaching
and learning that we have explored in this book will depend largely
on a commitment to collaborative leadership and governance struc-
ture. Everybody must be onboard.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 125 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 126 13-11-21 3:58 PM

127 127
Appendix
Blended learning course:
Introductory survey question examples
The purpose of this survey is to provide us with a shared understand-
ing of our backgrounds, computer experience, goals, and expectations
for this blended learning course.
1. Gender
□ Female
□ Male
2. Age
□ 15–19
□ 20–25
□ 26–30
□ 31 plus
3. Employment status
□ I have a full-time job.
□ I have a part-time job.
□ I am not presently working.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 127 13-11-21 3:58 PM

128 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
4. Previous experience with digital technology tools and applica-
tions. Please select as many items as applicable.
□ I own a smart phone (e.g., cell phone with Internet access).
□ I have a blog.
□ I have a Twitter account.
□ I have a Facebook account.
□ I have a YouTube account.
□ I have a Second Life account.
□ I have my own laptop.
5. Personal rating of computer skills
□ Novice (not really comfortable using computers)
□ Intermediate (comfortable using a computer)
□ Advanced (have developed some expertise and enjoy using
a computer)
6. Home Internet access
□ Yes
□ No
7. Course goals
What are your goals for this course? What do you want to take
away from this blended learning course experience?
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 128 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Appendix 129
8. Weekly class sessions
What do you expect will happen during the weekly class ses-
sions? What will the instructor do in class and what will you
do?
9. Outside of class work expectations
What type of work do you expect to do outside of the classroom
for this course, if any?
10. Assessment of learning
How do you think your learning in this course will be assessed?
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 129 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 130 13-11-21 3:58 PM

131 131
References
Akyol, Z., & Garrison, D. R. (2008). The development of a community of
inquiry over time in an online course: Understanding the progression
and integration of social, cognitive and teaching presence. Journal of
Asynchronous Learning Networks, 12(3), 3–22.
Akyol, Z., Vaughan, N., & Garrison, D. R. (2011). The impact of course duration
on the development of a community of inquiry. Interactive Learning
Environments, 19(3), 231–246.
Akyol, Z., & Garrison, D. R. (2011a). Assessing metacognition in an online
community of inquiry. Internet & Higher Education, 14(3), 183–190.
Akyol, Z., & Garrison, D. R. (2011b). Learning and satisfaction in online
communities of inquiry. In S. B. Eom & J. B. Arbaugh (Eds.), Student
satisfaction and learning outcomes in e-learning: An introduction to empirical
research (pp. 23–35). Hershey, PA: Information Science.
Akyol, Z., & Garrison, D. R. (2011c). Understanding cognitive presence in
an online and blended community of inquiry: Assessing outcomes and
processes for deep approaches to learning. British Journal of Educational
Technology, 42(2), 233–250.
Alverno College. (2001). Assessment essentials: Definition of terms. Available
online at: http://depts.alverno.edu/saal/terms.html
American Association of Higher Education and Accreditation. (1996). Nine
principles of good practice for assessing student learning. Available online at:
http://www.niu.edu/assessment/Manual/_docs/9Principles.pdf
Amirault, R. J., & Visser, Y. L. (2009). The university in periods of technological
change: A historically grounded perspective. Journal of Computing in Higher
Education, 21(1), 62–79.
Arbaugh, J. B. (2008). Does the community of inquiry framework predict
outcomes in online MBA courses? International Review of Research in Open
and Distance Learning, 9, 1–21.
Arbaugh, J. B., Cleveland-Innes, M., Diaz, S. R., Garrison, D. R., Ice, P.,
Richardson, J.C, & Swan, K. P. (2008). Developing a community of inquiry
instrument: Testing a measure of the community of inquiry framework
using a multi-institutional sample. The Internet and Higher Education,
11(3–4), 133–136.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 131 13-11-21 3:58 PM

132 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
Barkley, E. F. (2009). Student engagement techniques: A handbook for college
faculty. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Beckman, M. (1990). Collaborative learning: Preparation for the workplace and
democracy. College Teaching, 38(4), 128–133.
Bierly, P. E., Stark, E. M., & Kessler, E. H. (2009). The moderating effects of
virtuality on the antecedents and outcome of NPD team trust. Journal of
Product Innovation Management, 26, 551–565.
Biggs, J. (1998). Assumptions underlying new approaches to assessment. In P.
Stimson & P. Morris (Eds.), Curriculum and assessment in Hong Kong: Two
components, one system, (pp. 351–384). Hong Kong: Open University of
Hong Kong Press.
Bonk, C., Kim, K., & Zeng, X. (2004). Future directions of blended learning in
higher education and workplace learning settings. In C. J. Bonk & C. R.
Graham, C. R. (Eds.), Handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local
designs (pp. 550–568). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley.
Boston, W., Diaz, S. R., Gibson, A., Ice, P., Richardson, J., & Swan, K. (2009).
An exploration of the relationship between indicators of the community
of inquiry framework and retention in online programs. Journal of
Asynchronous Learning Networks, 13(3), 67–83.
Boud, D. (2000). Sustainable assessment: Rethinking assessment for the
learning society. Studies in Continuing Education, 22(2), 151–167.
Brown, J. S., & Adler, R. P. (2008). Minds on fire: Open education, the long tail,
and learning 2.0. EDUCAUSE Review, 17–32.
Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles of good practice
in undergraduate education. American Association for Higher Education
Bulletin, 39 (March), 3–7.
Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (Eds.). (1991). Applying the seven principles
for good practice in undergraduate education. New Directions for Teaching
and Learning, 47. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Cleveland-Innes, M., & Emes, C. (2005). Social and academic interaction in
higher education contexts and the effect on deep learning. National
Association of Student Personnel Administrators Journal, 42(2), 241-262.
Cleveland-Innes, M., & Garrison, D. R. (2009). The role of learner in an online
community of inquiry: Instructor support for first-time online learners.
In N. Karacapilidis (Ed.), Solutions and innovations in web-based technologies
for augmented learning: Improved platforms, tools and applications. Hershey,
PA: IGI Global.
Cleveland-Innes, M., & Garrison, D. R. (2011). Higher education and post-
industrial society: New ideas about teaching, learning, and technology.
In L. Moller & J. Huett (Eds.), The next generation of distance education:
Unconstrained learning. New York: Springer.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 132 13-11-21 3:58 PM

References 133
Cleveland-Innes, M., Garrison, R., & Kinsel, E. (2008). The role of learner in
an online community of inquiry: Responding to the challenges of first-
time online learners. In N. Karacapilidis (Ed.), Solutions and innovations in
web-based technologies for augmented learning: Improved platforms, tools and
applications. Hersey, PA: IGI Global.
Clifford, P., Friesen, S., & Lock, J. (2004). Coming to teach in the 21st century:
A research study conducted by the Galileo Education Network for Alberta
Learning. Available online from: http://www.galileo.org/research/
publications/ctt.pdf
Crouch, C. H., & Mazur, E. (2001). Peer instruction: Ten years of experience and
results. American Journal of Physics, 69(9), 970–977.
Downes, S. (2004). Educational blogging. EDUCAUSE Review, 39(5), 14–26.
Dziuban, C. D., Moskal, P. D., Bradford, G. R., Brophy-Ellison, J., & Groff, A.
T. (2010). Constructs that impact the net generation’s satisfaction with
online learning. In R. Sharpe, H. Beetham, & S. De Freitas (Eds.), Rethinking
learning for a digital age: How learners are shaping their own experiences. New
York, NY: Routledge.
Entwistle, N. J. (2000). Approaches to studying and levels of understanding:
The influences of teaching and assessment. In J. C. Smart (Ed.), Higher
education: Handbook of theory and research, XV (pp. 156–218). New York:
Agathon.
Entwistle, N., & Tait, H. (1990). Approaches to learning, evaluations of teaching,
and preferences for contrasting academic environments. Higher Education,
19, (169–194).
Eom, S. (2006). The role of instructors as a determinant of students’
satisfaction in university online education. In Proceedings of the Sixth
IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies – ICALT
(985–988). Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society.
Foundation Coalition. (2002). Peer assessment and peer evaluation. Available
online at: http://www.foundationcoalition.org/publications/
brochures/2002peer_assessment.pdf
Galileo Educational Network. (2011). What is inquiry? Available online at: http://
www.galileo.org/inquiry-what.html
Garrison, D. R. (2011). E-learning in the 21st century: A framework for research and
practice (2nd ed.). London, UK: Routledge/Falmer.
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical thinking in a text-
based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. Internet
and Higher Education, 11(2), 1–14.
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive
presence and computer conferencing in distance education. American
Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 7–23.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 133 13-11-21 3:58 PM

134 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
Garrison, D. R., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005). Facilitating cognitive presence
in online learning: Interaction is not enough. American Journal of Distance
Education, 19(3), 133–148.
Garrison, D. R., Cleveland-Innes, M., & Fung, T. (2010). Exploring causal
relationships among cognitive, social and teaching presence: Student
perceptions of the community of inquiry framework. The Internet and
Higher Education, 13(1–2), 31–36.
Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. (2008). Blended learning in higher education. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Geerdink, C. (2012, June 26). Learning to know: It’s all about curiousity. (Web
log comment). Available online at: http://www.neth-er.eu/en/news/
learning-know-it%E2%80%99s-all-about-curiosity
Gibbs, G. (2006). How assessment frames student learning. In C. Bryan & K.
Clegg (Eds.), Innovative assessment in higher education (pp. 23–36). London,
UK: Routledge.
Gibbs, G., & Simpson, C. (2004). Conditions under which assessment supports
students’ learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 1, 3–31.
Ginsberg, B. (2011). The fall of the faculty: The rise of the all-administrative
university and why it matters. New York: Oxford University Press.
Gorsky, P., Caspi, A., and Trumper, R. (2006). Campus-based university
students’ use of dialogue. Studies in Higher Education, 31(1), 71–87.
Hadjerrouit S. (2008). Towards a blended learning model for teaching and
learning computer programming: A case study. Informatics in Education,
7(2), 181–210.
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses
relating to achievement. New York: Routledge.
Hedberg, J., & Corrent-Agostinho, S. (1999). Creating a postgraduate virtual
community: Assessment drives learning. In B. Collis & R. Oliver (Eds.),
Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and
Telecommunications. (pp. 1093–1098). AACE: Chesapeake, VA. Available
online at: http://www.editlib.org /p/7040
Ice, P., Curtis, R., Phillips, P., & Wells, J. (2007). Using asynchronous audio
feedback to enhance teaching presence and students’ sense of community.
Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 11(2), 3–25.
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (1991). Cooperative learning:
Increasing college faculty instructional productivity. ASHE–FRIC Higher
Education Report No. 4. Washington, D.C.: School of Education and Human
Development, George Washington University.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 134 13-11-21 3:58 PM

References 135
Johnson, L., Levine, A., Smith, R., & Stone, S. (2010). The 2010 horizon report.
Austin, TX: The New Media Consortium. Available online at: www.nmc.
org/pdf/2010-Horizon-Report.pdf
Joubert, J. (1983). The notebooks of Joseph Joubert. (P. Auster, Ed. & Trans.). New
York: North Point Press. (Original work published in 1842.)
Kanuka, H. (2005). An exploration into facilitating higher levels of learning in
a text-based Internet learning environment using diverse instructional
strategies. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(3), article 8.
Available online at: http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol10/issue3/kanuka.html
Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges
and opportunities of social media. Business Horizons, 53(1), 59–68.
Keen, A. (2007). The cult of the amateur: How today’s Internet is killing our
culture. New York: Doubleday.
Keller, G. (2008). Higher education and the new society. Baltimore, MA: Johns
Hopkins University Press.
Knowles, M. S. (1986). Using learning contracts. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Scuh, J. H., Whitt, E. J., & Associates (2005). Student
success in college. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Lenhart, A., Purcell, K., Smith. A., & Zickuhr, K. (2010). Social media and mobile
internet use among teens and young adults. Washington, D.C.: Pew Internet
& American Life Project.
Leuf, B., & Cunningham, W. (2001). The wiki way: Quick collaboration on the web.
New York: Addison-Wesley.
Lipman, M. (1991). Thinking in education. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Lipman, M. (2003). Thinking in education (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Marton, F., & Saljo, R. (1984) Approaches to learning. In F. Marton, D. Hounsell,
& N. Entwistle (Eds.), The experience of learning, Edinburgh: Scottish
Academic Press.
McKeachie, W. J., Pintrich, P. R., Lin, Y. G., & Smith, D. A. F. (1986). Teaching
and learning in the college classroom: A review of the research literature.
Ann Arbor, MI: National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary
Teaching and Learning, University of Michigan.
Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-
regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback
practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 135 13-11-21 3:58 PM

136 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
Novak, G. M., Patterson, E. T., Gavrin, A. D., & Christian, W. (1999). Just-in-
time teaching: Blending active learning with web technology. Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
O’Reilly, T. (2005). What is web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the
next generation of software. Available online at: http://oreilly.com/web2/
archive/what-is-web-20.html
Ouimet, J. A., & Smallwood, R. A. (2005). CLASSE–the class-level survey of
student engagement. Assessment Update, 17(6), 13-15.
Pask, G. (1976). Conversation theory: Applications in education and epistemology.
Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Pelz, B. (2004). (My) three principles of effective online pedagogy. Journal of
Asynchronous Learning Networks, 8(3), 33–46.
Perry, W. G., Jr. (1981). Cognitive and ethical growth: The making of meaning.
In A. W. Chickering, The modern American college (pp. 76–116). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Pond, W. K. (2002, Summer). Distributed education in the 21st century:
Implications for quality assurance. Online Journal of Distance Learning
Administration, 5(2). Available online at: http://www.westga.edu/~distance/
ojdla/summer52/pond52.html
Ramsden, P. (2003). Learning to teach in higher education (2nd ed.). London Series
in Educational Innovation: Routledge.
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. (1996). Clay Patrick Bedford. Available online
at: http://www.rpi.edu/about/hof/bedford.html
Rowntree, D. (1977). Assessing students. London: Harper & Row.
Shea, P., & Bidjerano, T. (2009). Cognitive presence and online learner
engagement: A cluster analysis of the community of inquiry framework.
Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 21, 199–217.
Shea, P., Li, C. S., Swan, K., & Pickett, A. (2005). Developing learning
community in online asynchronous college courses: The role of teaching
presence. The Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 9(4), 59–82.
Sitzman, T., Ely, K., Brown, K. G., & Bauer, K. N. (2010). Adding a web-based
perspective to the self-assessment of knowledge: Compelling reasons to
utilize affective measures of learning. Academy of Management Learning &
Education, 9(2), 169–191.
Smith, S., Salaway, G., & Borreson Caruso, J. (2009). The ECAR study of
undergraduate students and information technology, 2009: Key findings.
Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research.
Teaching, Learning, and Technology (TLT) Group. (2011). Rubrics: Definition,
tools, examples, references. Available online at: http://www.tltgroup.org/
resources/flashlight/rubrics.htm
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 136 13-11-21 3:58 PM

References 137
Team-Based Learning Collaborative. (2011). Getting started with TBL. Available
online at: http://www.teambasedlearning.org/
Thistlethwaite, J. (2006). More thoughts on ‘assessment drives learning’.
Medical Education, 40(11), 1149–1150.
Tinney, J. (2013). A senior administrator’s view of technology and learning.
Education Canada, 53(4), Available online at: http://www.cea-ace.ca/
education-canada/article/senior-administrator%E2%80%99s-view-
technology-and-learning
US Department of Education. (2005). Toward a new golden age in American
education: How the Internet, the law, and today’s students are revolutionizing
expectations. Washington: USDE.
Vaughan, N. D. (2008). The use of wikis and weblogs to support deep
approaches to learning. The University College of Fraser Valley Research
Review, 1(3), 47–60. Available online at: http://journals.ucfv.ca/rr/RR13/
article-PDFs/6-vaughan.pdf
Vaughan, N. D. (2010a). A blended community of inquiry approach: Linking
student engagement to course redesign. Internet and Higher Education,
13(1–2), 60–65.
Vaughan, N. D. (2010b). How can students improve their academic course work
through the use of interactive learning technologies? Paper presented at the
2010 Canadian Society for Studies in Education (CSSE) Conference.
Yeh, S. S. (2009). The cost-effectiveness of raising teacher quality. Educational
Research Review, 4(3), 220–232.
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 137 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 138 13-11-21 3:58 PM

139 139
affective expression, 57
assessment (see also self-
assessment): design of,
33; of inquiry study, 69;
by instructor, 91–94; and
learning contracts, 71–72; of
participation, 32, 40; of peers,
87–91; principles of, 82–83;
student/teacher views of, 81–
82; tied to critical thinking,
41–42; triad-approach to,
94–95
asynchronous communication:
advantages of, 39–40, 41;
and assessment, 93–94;
and design, 24, 36–37; and
facilitation, 47; importance of,
9; strategies for facilitating,
51, 52, 54
Blackboard, 26, 29, 88, 111, 118
blended learning: and assessment,
94–95; defined, 1, 8;
described, 8–10; and
facilitation, 45–46; and future
of technology, 119–120, 122;
introductory survey questions
for, 127–129; need for, 2–3, 7;
principles of, 3–4, 17–18
blogs, 60, 86, 89, 93, 104–106, 107
brainstorming, 40, 115
Classroom Survey of Student
Engagement (CLASSE), 43
cognitive presence: design of,
34–44; and direct instruction,
64–65; direct instruction
strategies for, 75–79; as
part of Community of
Inquiry framework, 11–12;
principles of, 54–55, 72–73;
responsibility for, 14, 73–75;
strategies for facilitating,
55–60
collaboration (see also Community
of Inquiry (CoI)): assessment
of, 42; and future of social
media, 119–120; in inquiry-
based project, 68–71; and
interpersonal relationships,
66–67; as key to Community
of Inquiry, 3, 99–100; and
leadership, 123–125; and shift
in higher education, 97–100;
in strategies for facilitating
cognitive presence, 55–60;
synchronous applications of,
118
collaborative constructivism, 34,
125
committed relativism, 58
Community of Inquiry (CoI): and
assessment principles, 83; and
changing technology, 121–122;
and collaboration, 3, 99–100;
design concerns, 19–21; and
direct instruction, 64–65;
and leadership, 123–125;
principles of, 4, 17–18, 49;
responsibilities of direct
instruction in, 73–75; Survey,
43; theoretical framework for,
10–15
course evaluation, 43
Index
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 139 13-11-21 3:58 PM

140 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
course textbooks, 110
critical thinking: activities for,
38–39; and assessment,
41–42; and cognitive presence,
36, 57–58; in inquiry-based
project rubric, 69–70; through
Community of Inquiry, 10
debates, 104
design. see instructional design
digital storytelling, 116
digital technologies, 69, 84–85,
87–91, 92–95
direct instruction: in delivery
of cognitive presence,
39; principle of cognitive
presence, 72–73; principle
of social presence, 65–67;
responsibilities for cognitive
presence, 73–75; role of, 47,
63–65; strategies for online
discussion, 75–79; strategies
for social presence, 68–71
engagement: and cognitive
presence, 41, 43, 54; and direct
instruction, 67; and guidelines
for online discussion, 30–31;
importance of, 9; modelling of,
32; and teaching presence, 47
expert assessment, 69, 70, 74, 93
exploration, 34, 36, 57–59, 69, 75,
79, 108
Facebook, 111–112
facilitation: and discussion,
31–33; importance of, 45–46;
integrating face-to-face with
online, 60–61; principles of,
48–49, 54–55; role of, 47–48;
strategies for facilitating
cognitive presence, 55–60;
strategies for facilitating social
presence, 50–54; techniques
for cognitive presence, 40–41
Galileo Educational Network,
68–71
Google Docs, 84, 88, 92
group cohesion: activities for, 27,
28; designing for, 25–26;
and direct instruction,
66–67; and facilitation by
instructor, 31–33; as focus at
beginning of inquiry process,
13; and guidelines for online
discussion, 30–31; strategies
for facilitating, 49, 50–54
group essays, 108
group projects, 26, 27, 28. see also
team–based learning
individual presentations, 114
inquiry (see also Community of
Inquiry (CoI)): and design of
cognitive presence, 34–44; as
focus of principles of practice,
4; as part of critical thinking,
10; practical model for, 75–76,
79, 102, 108; principle of, 54–
55; project rubric for, 68–71;
strategies for facilitating,
55–60
instructional design: of cognitive
presence, 34–44; planning
process of, 21–24; questions
and concerns about, 19–21; of
social presence, 24–33
instructor assessment, 91–95
integration, 9, 10–11, 60–61, 76,
79, 108
Internet, 20, 32. see also blogs;
social media; social
networking; wikis
interpersonal relationships, 25, 29,
49, 50, 66–67
journals, 75, 86–87, 89
Just-in-Time Teaching (JiTT),
102–103
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 140 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Index 141
leadership, 64, 123–125
learning contracts, 71–72
learning objects, 113–114
mashups, 114–116
metacognition, 74–75, 77, 83–84
Multimedia Educational Resource
for Learning and Online
Teaching (MERLOT), 113–114
online discussion: activities for,
38–39; and assigned readings,
41; for building group
cohesion, 26, 27; design of, 36;
direct instruction strategies
for, 75–79; guidelines for
etiquette of, 30–31; and
narrated presentations,
114; and social networking,
111–112; in strategies for
facilitating cognitive presence,
56–60; and student's
preferred learning style, 40;
and wikis, 89–90, 108, 109
online journals, 86–87, 89
open communication: activities
for, 28; and availability of
instructor, 36; designing for,
25–26; and direct instruction,
66–67; and facilitation by
instructor, 31–33; as focus at
beginning of inquiry process,
13; and guidelines for online
discussion, 30–31
organization, 25–28, 35–39
peer assessment, 69, 75, 87–91
peer review, 59, 105–106, 107
podcasts, 112–113
Practical Inquiry Model, 75–76, 79,
102, 108
pre-class activities, 102–103,
112–113
principles: of assessment, 82–83;
of blended learning, 3–4,
17–18; of cognitive presence,
54–55, 72–73; of Community
of Inquiry, 4, 17–18, 49; as
guide to design, 22; of social
presence, 48–49, 65–67; of
teaching and learning, 15–16
resolution, 58, 73, 76, 79, 108
rubric, 68–71, 76–77, 84–85, 87
scaffolding, 58
scripting, 40
self-assessment, 42, 69, 76–77,
83–87
self-coding, 75–76
self-reflection, 94–95, 105
self-regulation, 48, 57, 65, 74
social bookmarking, 101–104
social content, 112–114
social media, 26–28, 60, 98–99,
100–101, 119–120
social networking, 110–112
social presence: design of, 24–33;
as part of Community of
Inquiry framework, 11,
12, 13; principle of direct
instruction, 65–67;
principle of facilitation,
48–49; responsibility for,
14; strategies for direct
instruction of, 68–71;
strategies for facilitating,
50–54
storytelling, 116
student moderation, 77–78
study groups, 110–111
synchronous communication:
advantages of, 39–40, 41;
applications of, 116–118;
and assessment, 93–94;
and design, 24, 36–37; and
facilitation, 47; importance of,
9; strategies for facilitating,
51, 52, 54
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 141 13-11-21 3:58 PM

142 Teaching in Blended Learning Environments
teaching presence: defined, 2; and
design concerns, 20; and direct
instruction, 64; explained,
46–48; as part of Community
Inquiry framework, 11, 12; and
principles of practice, 3–4;
requirements of, 14–15; shared
responsibility for, 13–14, 47–48
team-based learning, 67, 68–71, 104,
106
technology, 119–122, 123–125. see also
digital technologies
TitanPad, 106, 115
triggering event, 56, 58, 75, 79, 102,
108
trust, building of, 25, 66
virtual worlds, 46, 118–119
wikis: applications of, 106–110;
for group cohesion, 26, 27;
and mashups, 115; and online
discussion, 89–90, 108, 109;
strategies for using, 60; used in
inquiry-based project, 69
word clouds, 115–116
Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 142 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 143 13-11-21 3:58 PM

Teaching in Blended Learning Environments interior.indd 144 13-11-21 3:58 PM