ArticlePDF Available


24 Bulletin of the South Ural State University. Ser. Education.
Educational Sciences. 2016, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 24–30
The aim of this paper is to give an introduc-
tory overview of ‘blended learning’, first by in-
vestigating the meaning of the term, then secondly
by looking at different models, together with
some suggested ways of classifying them. Fi-
nally, the implications of these models for practi-
tioners are examined, by considering the rationales
for adopting blended learning and the challenges
involved in its implementation.
The origins of blended learning pre-date the
advent of digital technology. Its genealogy lies
in distance learning through correspondence
courses. In Canada, for example, the children of
lighthouse keepers were among those educated
thanks to a 1919 scheme [1]. The goal of bridging
distance remains a possible motive for using
blended learning. The rise of personal computing
in the eighties and the advent of the worldwide
web in the nineties encouraged the development
of new models of the learning process at different
levels of education. In higher education, one such
new model was Diane Laurillard’s ‘conversa-
tional’ approach, which regards learning as an
iterative dialogue between student and teacher.
This model remains an influence on current de-
bates about blended learning [2]. Digital techno-
logy also began to be introduced into the field of
private sector training, where Friesen finds the
term ‘blended learning’ used as early as 1999 [3].
The new technology had the potential not only to
bridge space, but also to bridge time (through
recording), and to individualise learning (by
giving the student control over their path through
the material, and over the pace of learning).
This quartet of time, place, path and pace meant
that different educators could value the new tech-
nology for different reasons, and have different
conceptions of what the new ‘blended learning’
might mean.
Friesen found that, in the early days of
blended learning, the term could mean ‘almost
any combination of technologies, pedagogies and
even job tasks’. Definitions might cover any in-
structional technology at all, or restrict them-
selves to web-based technology; they might not
mention technology specifically, but instead fo-
cus on blending different theoretical approaches
[3]. Procter defined blended learning in 2003 as
‘the effective combination of different modes
of delivery, models of teaching and styles of
learning’ [4]. According to Chew, Jones and
Turner, ‘blended learning involves the combina-
tion of two fields of concern: education and edu-
cational technology’ [5]. The broad nature of
these definitions meant that critics such as Oliver
and Trigwell could attack the concept as ill-
DOI: 10.14529/ped160204
. Bryan,,
K.N. Volchenkova,
South Ural State University, Chelyabinsk, Russian Federation
The Project 5-100 initiated by the Ministry of Education of Russian Federation is aimed a
the internationalization of leading Russian Universities at global education market. In 2015
South Ural State University (SUSU, Chelyabinsk) became part of the Project 5-100, whic
along with great opportunities posed a number of targets to be achieved to prove the efficienc
of changes to be introduced into the education process. One of the projects in SUSU’s Roa
Map is aimed to introduce an innovative system of English language training for bachelor stu-
dents, which is impossible without the usage of new educational technologies. One of the tech-
nologies considered an efficient one is that of blended learning. The article analyzes the concep
of blended learning and its didactic possibilities to make an effective transition from a traditional
learning model to an integrated one feasible, with electronic environments and resources being
widely used. The authors give a critical overview of the existing blended learning models. The
also consider the ways blended learning can be adopted for the Russian higher education system,
with the focus on the “foreign language” training. The results can be used to develop the models
of blended learning courses for higher education.
Keywords: Project 5-100, technology, blended learning, model, integration, language
Брайан А., Волченкова К.Н. Смешанное обучение: определение, модели,
использование в системе высшего образования
Вестник ЮУрГУ. Серия «Образование. Педагогические науки».
2016. Т. 8, 2. С. 24–30
defined [6]. Eventually different understandings
began to converge. An influential early definition
was that of Graham, who proposed that ‘Blended
learning systems combine face-to-face instruction
with computer-mediated instruction’ [7]. This de-
fines the concept in terms of two modes of course
delivery, and defines the blend as some combina-
tion of two modes. At the time Graham offered
this definition, computer-mediated communica-
tion was seen as largely asynchronous and text-
based. Now that teleconferencing applications
are common, Friesen has suggested the need
to redefine ‘face-to-face’ (F2F) as ‘co-present’.
For Friesen, “Blended learning” designates the
range of possibilities presented by combining
Internet and digital media with established class-
room forms that require the physical copresence
of teacher and students’ [3].
Other theorists and practitioners offer defini-
tions, which are similar to those of Graham and
Friesen. For Staker and Horn, blended learning is
‘a formal education program in which a student
learns at least in part through online delivery
of content and instruction with some element of
student control over time, place, path, and/or
pace and at least in part at a supervised brick-
and-mortar location away from home’ [8]. This
definition emphasises that content and instruction
must be delivered online, meaning that a tradi-
tional face-to-face course in which students are
encouraged to use the internet for research does
not qualify as blended learning. The phrase ‘su-
pervised brick-and-mortar location’ means that
the ‘face-to-face’ element need not necessarily
consist of traditional classroom contact. Hew and
Cheung follow Staker and Horn [9]. Watson
and Murin give an expanded version of Staker
and Horn’s: ‘a formal education program in
which a student learns at least in part through
online learning, with some element of student
control over time, place, path, and/or pace; at
least in part in a supervised brick-and-mortar lo-
cation away from home; and the modalities along
each student’s learning path within a course or
subject are connected to provide an integrated
learning experience’ [10].
For Krasnova, blended learning may be de-
fined as a ‘method of teaching that combines the
most effective face-to-face teaching techniques
and online interactive collaboration, both consti-
tuting a system that functions in constant correla-
tion and forms a single whole’ [11].
Stacey and Gerbic consider a range of defini-
tions of the term, but at a minimum it involves
‘some combination of virtual and physical envi-
ronments’ [12]. For Launer, it is ‘the combination
of technology supported self or distance study
settings and face-to-face settings’ [13].
Aside from the broad nature of many early
definitions of the concept, Oliver and Trigwell
made one more important criticism of blended
learning. They argued that by focusing on modes
of delivery, theorists were actually focusing more
on teaching than on learning. While this critique
might not be wholly fair, it does highlight the
danger of pursuing technology without ade-
quately considering how it contributes to the
learning process [6].
The term ‘hybrid learning’ appears to be
almost synonymous with ‘blended learning’,
however that is defined. In the rest of this paper
Friesen’s definition, given above, will be adopted,
unless otherwise indicated.
The definitions of blended learning deve-
loped by Graham and Friesen, noted above, re-
volve around bimodal delivery, involving a face-
to-face or ‘co-present’ element, and a computer-
mediated element. However, the ways in which
these elements are used for different learning
purposes, and the balance between the elements,
allow for more than one model to be constructed
consistent with these definitions. How may these
different models be characterised and classified?
One early typology, suitable for the world of
work-related training, was that of Valiathan. This
divided blended learning models into three types:
those which are skill-driven, aimed at the acquisi-
tion of specific knowledge and skills, where the
instructor gives feedback and support; those
which are attitude-driven, aimed at the develop-
ment of new attitudes and behaviours, where
peer-to-peer interaction and group work are cen-
tral; and those which are competency-driven,
aimed at capturing tacit knowledge, where
learners must observe experts at work [14]. This
typology has been criticised for its mixed nature,
as it is based on both learning objectives and on
pedagogical methods [6].
A more influential approach is exemplified
by Staker and Horn [8]. They work with a typo-
logy of four models, reduced from an original
six. The six original models were: (1) the face-to-
face driven model, in which classroom learning is
supplemented with online learning; (2) the rota-
tion model, in which students rotate between
working online and other classroom-based mo-
dalities; (3) the flex model, in which students
Теория и методика профессионального образования
26 Bulletin of the South Ural State University. Ser. Education.
Educational Sciences. 2016, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 24–30
study mainly online according to an individually
customised schedule, and face-to-face support is
provided by the teacher as needed’ (4) the online
lab model, in which students supplement their
traditional studies by taking an additional online
course on-campus; (5) the self-blend model,
in which students supplement their traditional
studies by taking an additional online course off-
campus; (6) the enriched virtual model, in which
learning is mainly online with occasional visits to
a brick-and-mortar setting for face-to-face tui-
tion. They decided to eliminate model (1) as in-
sufficiently different to (2) and (3), and to merge
(4) and (5). This left them with the rotation, flex,
self-blend and enriched virtual models. They note
different variants of the rotation model, according
to whether the student rotates within the class-
room, to another room, or off-campus. The most
interesting variant of the rotation model is the
‘flipped classroom’. Here the student studies
online, at a location of their own choosing, in
order to receive basic content and instruction.
The classroom is used for higher-order tasks such
as discussion and evaluation. Thus the order in
which the classroom is used for transmission of
information, and homework for higher-order
assessment of what has been learned, is reversed.
The Staker-and-Horn typology is clearly in-
formed by their ‘bimodal’ definition of blended
Graham suggested classifying blended learning
models according to four dimensions, four levels,
and three types [7]. His four dimensions were
space (face-to-face/virtual), time (synchro-
nous/asynchronous), sensual richness (high, all
senses/low, text only) and humanness (high hu-
man, no machine/low human, high machine).
These are related to the idea of blended learning
as defined by bimodal delivery. A second, and
entirely different element of classification is in-
troduced by his consideration of level: activity,
course, program and institution. Using blended
methods for individual learning activities is quite
different from blended learning as an institution-
wide approach. Finally, Graham introduced three
different categories of blend, related to purpose:
enabling blends, which focus on access and
flexibility; enhancing blends, which seek to sup-
plement traditional pedagogy; and transformative
blends, aimed at changing pedagogy, which for
Graham meant for example that learners could
play a more active role in the construction of
their own knowledge. There is a clear implicit
hierarchy here, in which transformation is
the most worthwhile goal. Graham therefore
moved beyond modalities in his typology to con-
sider both scope and pedagogical purpose.
Chew, Jones and Turner not only examined
four different models of blended learning but in-
troduced a theoretical basis for critiquing them,
by using Vygotsky’s and Maslow’s insights into
learning [5]. The first model they consider is Gill
Salmon’s structured e-moderation, in which the
moderator follows a series of steps to make the
student feel welcome in an online environment.
Chew et al praise this model as consistent with
Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. However, it cannot
really be considered a model of blended learning
in Friesen’s sense of the term, and this is pro-
bably a consequence of the fact that the authors
began with their own rather looser definition of
blended learning. The second model is Sun Mi-
crosoft Systems’ ‘learning ecology’, documented
by Wenger and Ferguson. This model takes the
form of a quadrant, with self-directed/guided
learning and content/practice axes. Self-directed
study of content could mean reading a book or
asynchronous online content. Self-directed prac-
tice might involve peer-to-peer student discus-
sion. Guided study of content might involve
a classroom lecture or video conference. Guided
practice might involve mentoring or using a prac-
tice laboratory. This model has the virtue that it
makes clear that different learning objectives can
be delivered using different modes of delivery,
a point noted elsewhere by Singh [15]. Chew et
al credit the model for its potential to be consis-
tent with the insights of Vygotsky about the Zone
of Proximal Development. The learner can con-
struct their own knowledge under expert guidance.
Its weakness is that is does not express a clear
model for implementation.
Chew et al’s third model is Jones’ Blended
Learning Continuum. While the University of
Glamorgan took an institution-wide approach to
blended learning, it did not implement it in a uni-
form way, rather allowing departments to place
different modules on a spectrum of e-intensi-
veness from the minimal (Powerpoint slides) to
the wholly-delivered online. Intermediate points
on the scale represent access to learning re-
sources, followed by discussion boards, online
assessment and interactive material. This model
is extremely flexible and recognises that different
disciplines may implement blended learning in
different ways. Chew et al reject the idea that
Jones’ Continuum should be cast in percentage
terms as Allen, Seaman and Garrett advocate.
Брайан А., Волченкова К.Н. Смешанное обучение: определение, модели,
использование в системе высшего образования
Вестник ЮУрГУ. Серия «Образование. Педагогические науки».
2016. Т. 8, 2. С. 24–30
The idea that only a course which is 30–80%
online is blended is an oversimplification, even
if it could be agreed what it is that should be
measured. However, the model is concerned
only with modes of delivery and is theoretically
weak [5].
The fourth model is Garrison and Vaughan’s
Inquiry-Based Framework, which envisages stu-
dents and teachers as participants in a Commu-
nity of Inquiry. This term itself is based on Wen-
ger’s work on ‘communities of practice’ [16].
Just as a community of practice consists of
a group of practitioners who share a concern and
learn how to do it better as they interact, so
a Community of Inquiry consists of collaborative
learners who construct their own knowledge as
they interact. This model shifts the emphasis
away from modes of delivery to learning. Tech-
nology’s role is to enable the three main elements
of cognitive presence (information exchange,
creating and testing concepts), teaching presence
(providing structure and direction) and social
presence (allowing group collaboration). Chew et
al see the model as being consistent with many
of the insights of Vygotsky and Maslow. The pro-
cess of operationalising such a vision takes time
and effort, however [17, 18].
Implications of the models
The implications of the different models for
practitioners of blended learning depend on the
intended goals of adopting it, and on how suc-
cessfully the challenges of implementing it are
met. For example, take the ‘learning ecology’
model discussed above. One of the considerations
in developing this model was cost-effectiveness.
To someone focused on cost-savings, online self-
study may seem an attractive mode of delivery.
To someone focused on constructivist and col-
laborative visions of learning, online group dis-
cussion may be the crucial feature of course de-
livery. Either goal may fail to be achieved, for
example if software licensing fees are higher than
expected, or if online discussion is cumbersome
or badly moderated. More than one goal is com-
patible with the model, and the goal is not gua-
ranteed by the model.
Graham listed six different rationales for
adopting blended learning: ‘(1) pedagogical rich-
ness, (2) access to knowledge, (3) social interac-
tion, (4) personal agency, (5) cost-effectiveness,
and (6) ease of revision’ [7]. Of these, (1), (2)
and (5) have been found to be the most popular
reasons [7].
Taking access first, Procter [4] and Heinze
and Procter [19] suggest that blended learning
can improve access to learning for part-time stu-
dents. Graham [7] lists studies, which show im-
proved access. Few people doubt the potential of
blended learning to improve access, and such
debate as occurs revolves mainly around the con-
cept of a ‘digital divide’ in which some sections
of society lack the digital means and/or literacy
to benefit from widening access. This concern
has diminished in importance in developed coun-
tries as digital technology has spread.
As for cost-effectiveness, this is a matter of
some debate. Graham [7] reports potentially high
returns on investment. By contrast Launer denies
that blended learning is cheaper, because of the
costs of adapting materials, the cost of ICT infra-
structure, the need for technical support and the
unwisdom of cutting back on teaching support to
learners [13]. Graham and Dziuban note that staff
savings are the main source of cost savings in
introducing blended learning [20].
The biggest debate revolves around peda-
gogical effectiveness. One advantage of blended
learning is that it has the potential to accommo-
date different learning styles [4]. The question is
whether it will deliver that potential. Take the
case of the lecture. The role of the lecture in
higher education has been called into question
for some time now, though it is still a common
means of imparting knowledge. It has been
fiercely criticised because of its largely unidirec-
tional nature and inefficiency [21]. ‘Lecture cap-
ture’ can allow students to watch lectures at
a time and pace of their own choosing, thereby
making the process more efficient and accessible
to all. However, in the research by Moskal et al,
‘lecture capture’ is portrayed as a less popular
alternative to blended learning [17]. It appears
that two of the advantages claimed for online
technology (its ability to bridge time and space)
are insufficient to make lectures as attractive as
more fully blended learning. Take another case,
that of group discussion. One advantage some-
times claimed for online discussion is that it al-
lows shy members of a group to participate more
readily [9]. However, evidence has also been
found that shows some students feel just as in-
hibited from participating in online discussion
[19]. The implication seems to be that simply to
move an activity online is not sufficient to secure
a pedagogical gain. Other factors, such as style of
lecturing or style of moderation, may be just as
The overall picture on pedagogical effec-
tiveness has shifted in recent years. As the hype
surrounding blended learning grew in its early
Теория и методика профессионального образования
28 Bulletin of the South Ural State University. Ser. Education.
Educational Sciences. 2016, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 24–30
years, the balloon was punctured by some re-
search by Thomas Russell. His investigation of
the ‘No Significant Difference Phenomenon’
seemed to demonstrate that learning outcomes
were remarkably indifferent to the means of de-
livery used, for studies conducted over a long
period of time [22, 23]. More recently the out-
comes of studies, such as those noted by Graham
and Dziuban [20] have shifted in favour of
blended learning, but it has been suggested that
this is explained partly by an alteration in the
course content being delivered, so as to make it
more suitable for online methods [23]. One ex-
planation for this might be that online assessment
methods are geared to what can be automated,
something, which is preferred only by novice
students [20]. This coincides with anxiety in
some countries, such as Britain, that students are
becoming less able to cope with the traditional
demands of study such as reading a whole book,
according to some because of the influence of
new technology [24, 25]. However, a meta-
analysis by the US Department of Education
found that blended learning produces better re-
sults than, either face-to-face alone or wholly
online methods. The authors were careful to note
that they could not be sure that this effect was
entirely due to blended learning without the ability
to control for other factors such as time spent
studying [26]. In general, it is extremely difficult
for educational researchers to generate hard ex-
perimental evidence about the effectiveness of
different methods because there are so many fac-
tors to control for, and because of the ethical and
practical difficulties in doing so [27].
Given these ambiguities, Krasnova’s advice
to ‘keep an open mind and to focus on the learning
experience’ seems wise [11]. Her approach to tea-
ching a foreign language using blended learning
is pragmatic, using online methods for the roles
to which they are best suited. Thus, a grammar
module is available for independent study and is
assessed by automated tests set at different levels,
which the student can choose. Other modules are
used as supplements or elective options. The ap-
proach broadly matches that advocated by Launer,
in which the acquisition of lexis and grammar are
seen as more suitable for online methods, while
communicative activities, especially speaking
and writing, require teacher involvement [13].
On the whole, perceptive language skills (listen-
ing and reading) trained online as well as online
assessment can both decrease the burden put on
the instructor and provide the students with the
possibility to follow their individual track.
The concept of blended learning can not be
defined precisely as different scholars put dif-
ferent content into the term, though all of re-
searchers agree that blended learning is an inte-
grated learning experience that is controlled and
guided by the instructor whether in the form
of face-to-face communication or his virtual pre-
sence. Technological innovation is expanding the
range of possible solutions that can be brought to
bear on teaching and learning. Whether we are
primarily interested in creating more effective
learning experiences, increasing access and fle-
xibility, or reducing the cost of learning, it is likely
that our learning systems will provide a blend of
face-to-face and computer mediated experiences.
Future learning systems will be differentiated not
based on whether they blend but rather by how
they blend. This question of how to blend is one of
the most important we can consider as we move
into the future. Like any design problem this chal-
lenge is highly context dependent with a practi-
cally infinite number of possible solutions.
1. Barbour M. History of K-12 Online and
Blended Instruction Worldwide’. Handbook of
Research on K-12 Online and Blended Learning.
N.P., ETC Press Publ., 2014, pp. 25–50.
2. Heinze A., Procter C.T. Reflections on
the Use of Blended Learning. Available at:
_paper9_5.pdf (accessed 17.03.2016).
3. Friesen M. Report: Defining Blended
Learning. Available at:
virtual-begin/ (accessed 17.03.2016).
4. Procter C.T. Blended Learning in Practice.
Available at:
papers/cp_03.rtf (accessed 17.03.2016).
5. Chew E., Jones N., Turner D. Critical
Review of the Blended Learning Models Based on
Maslow’s and Vygotsky’s Educational Theory’
in Hybrid Learning and Education. Berlin,
Springer Verlag Publ., 2008, pp. 40–53. DOI:
6. Oliver M., Trigwell K. Can Blended
Learning Be Redeemed? E-Learning, 2005,
no. 2(1), pp. 17–26. DOI: 10.2304/elea.2005.2.1.17
7. Graham C.R. Blended Learning Systems:
Definition, Current Trends, and Future Direc-
tions. The Handbook of Blended Learning:
Global Perspectives, Local Designs. San Fran-
cisco, Pfeiffer Publ., 2006, pp. 3–21.
8. Staker H., Horn M.B. Classifying K-12
Брайан А., Волченкова К.Н. Смешанное обучение: определение, модели,
использование в системе высшего образования
Вестник ЮУрГУ. Серия «Образование. Педагогические науки».
2016. Т. 8, 2. С. 24–30
Blended Learning. Available at: http://www.
04/Classifying-K-12-blended-learning.pdf (ac-
cessed 17.03.2016).
9. Hew K.F., Cheung W.S. Using Blended
Learning: Evidence-Based Practices. London,
Springer Publ., 2014. 123 p.
10. Watson J., Murin A. A History of K-12
Online and Blended Instruction in the United
States. Handbook of Research on K-12 Online
and Blended Learning. N.P., ETC Press Publ.,
2014, pp. 1–24.
11. Krasnova T. A Paradigm Shift: Blended
Learning Integration in Russian Higher Edu-
cation. Procedia – Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 2015, no. 166, pp. 399–403. DOI:
12. Stacey E., Gerbic P. Success Factors
for Blended Learning. Available at: http://www.
pdf (accessed 17.03.2016).
13. Launer R. Five Assumptions on Blended
Learning: What Is Important to Make Blended
Learning a Successful Concept? Hybrid Learning.
Berlin, Springer Verlag Publ., 2010, pp. 9–15.
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-14657-2_2
14. Valiathan P. Blended Learning Models.
Available at: wp-
Models-2002-ASTD.pdf (accessed 17.03.2016).
15. Singh H. Building Effective Blended
Learning Programs. Educational Technology,
2006, no. 43(6), pp. 51–54.
16. Wenger E. Communities of Practice:
a Brief Introduction. Available at: http://wenger- (accessed 17.03.2016).
17. Moskal P., Dziuban C., Hartman J.
Blended Learning: A Dangerous Idea? Internet
and Higher Education, 2013, no. 18, pp. 15–23.
DOI: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.12.001
18. Vaughan N.D. A Blended Community
of Inquiry: Linking student and course redesign.
Internet and Higher Education, 2009, no. 13,
pp. 60–65. DOI: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.007
19. Heinze A., Procter C.T. Reflections
on the Use of Blended Learning. Available at:
_paper9_5.pdf (accessed 17.03.2016).
20. Graham C.R., Dziuban C.D. Blended
Learning Environments. Handbook of Research
on Educational Communications and Technology.
Mahwah, Lawrence Earlbaum Publ., 2008,
pp. 269–276.
21. Ellis C. You Can’t Do That in a Class-
room!: How Distributed Learning Can Assist in
the Widespread Adoption of Hybrid Learning
Strategies. Hybrid Learning and Education: Pro-
ceedings of First International Conference. Ber-
lin, Springer Verlag Publ., 2008, pp. 1–16. DOI:
22. Ramage T.R. The “No Significant Dif-
ference” Phenomenon: A Literature Review.
Available at:
pubs/1 (accessed 17.03.2016).
23. WCET (WICHE Cooperative for Edu-
cation Technologies). The No Significant Dif-
ference Phenomenon. Available at: http:// (accessed
24. Pells R. University Students are Strug-
gling to Read Entire Books. Available at: http://
a6986361.html (accessed 17.03.2016).
25. Furedi F. We Must Instil a Love of
Reading in Students. Available at: https://www.
instil-a-love-of-reading-in-students (accessed
26. Means B., Toyama Y., Murphy R.,
Bakia M., Jones K. Evaluation of Evidence-
Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-
Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies.
Washington, US Department of Education Publ.,
2010. 94 p.
27. Lowes S. A Brief Look at the Metho-
dologies Used in the Research on Online Tea-
ching and Learning. Handbook of Research on
K-12 Online and Blended Learning. N.P., ETC
Press Publ., 2014, pp. 83–106.
Received 20 March 2016
Теория и методика профессионального образования
30 Bulletin of the South Ural State University. Ser. Education.
Educational Sciences. 2016, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 24–30
УДК 378.14:001.891 + 378.014 DOI: 10.14529/ped160204
ББК Ч448.44 + 448.02
А. Брайан, К.Н. Волченкова
Южно-Уральский государственный университет, г. Челябинск
Проект 5-100, реализуемый Министерством Образования Российской Федерации, на-
правлен на интернационализацию ведущих российских университетов на мировом образо-
вательном рынке. В 2015 году Южно-Уральский государственный университет (ЮУрГУ)
стал частью этого проекта, что, наряду с возможностью кардинальных преобразований
привело к необходимости выполнения ряда показателей, которые нужно достичь для того,
чтобы подтвердить эффективность вводимых мер. Одним из проектов в Дорожной Карте
ЮУрГУ стал проект по внедрению системы углубленной языковой подготовки студентов
бакалавриата. Реализация данного проекта невозможна без внедрения новых технологий
обучения, одной из которых является технология смешанного обучения.
В статье дается определение технологии смешанного обучения, анализируется ее по-
тенциальные возможности в качестве дидактического средства при переходе с традицион-
ной модели обучения на интегрированную модель с привлечением электронных средств и
ресурсов. Рассматриваются существующие модели смешанного обучения, обсуждаются
способы их адаптации под условия российской вузовской системы подготовки на примере
учебной дисциплины «Иностранный язык». Результаты анализа технологии смешанного
обучения могут быть использованы при разработке интегрированной модели обучения
в системе высшего образования.
Ключевые слова: Проект 5-100, технология, смешанное обучение, модель, интеграция,
языковая подготовка.
Брайан Антоний, доцент кафедры русского языка как иностранного языка, Институт лин-
гвистики и международных коммуникаций, Южно-Уральский государственный университет,
г. Челябинск,
Волченкова Ксения Николаевна, доцент кафедры русского языка как иностранного языка,
Институт лингвистики и международных коммуникаций, Южно-Уральский государственный
университет, г. Челябинск,
Поступила в редакцию 20 марта 2016 г.
Bryan, A. Blended learning: definition, models, impli-
cations for higher education / A. Bryan, K.N. Volchen-
kova // Вестник ЮУрГУ. Серия «Образование. Педа-
гогические науки». – 2016. – Т. 8, 2. – С. 24–30.
DOI: 10.14529/ped160204
Bryan A., Volchenkova K.N. Blended Learning:
Definition, Models, Implications for Higher Education.
Bulletin of the South Ural State University. Ser.
Education. Educational Sciences. 2016, vol. 8, no. 2,
pp. 24–30. DOI: 10.14529/ped160204
... Simplifies the definition of BL as combining face-to-face and online learning [6]. Meanwhile, BL is a form of learning using the internet using various applications by combining direct learning in class with online learning [7]. This strategy combines traditional learning with learning activities using computer media with tablets, smartphones, or other technology to be more attractive to students than just face-to-face learning or online learning [8]. ...
... Meanwhile, Graham categorized them into three: i) Enabling blends, which focus on access and convenience, but the learning provides a different modality; ii) Enhancing blends, which seek to supplement face to face learning with online repository; and iii) Transformative blends, at changing pedagogy, which means the learning through technology [11]. The different types of blended learning for teachers or instructors depend on the goals and its challenges [7]. ...
Full-text available
span lang="EN-US">The learning characteristic in the 21st century is the availability of information anywhere and anytime. Blended learning (BL) became the most widely used learning strategy in vocational education. However, the problem is the effectiveness of BL on student outcomes. This scoping review provides an overview of the implementation of the BL model on vocational students. The research questions in this review were: i) What type of BL was taken?; ii) How did the BL model works?; and iii) What was improved in student learning outcomes? The research method adopted the scoping review from Arksey & Markey. From the beginning, the research article data was taken from the Scopus database. The article selection using the PRISMA method obtained 32 articles from 4,298 articles. The results of the review showed that there were three types of BL models. The three types of BL were: i) The flipped classroom model; ii) The station-rotation model; and iii) The self-blend model. BL syntax that teachers most favored in nine ways, but mainly with the syntax: “Face-to-face (F2F) finished, after that online learning for enrichment”. Meanwhile, most of the articles improved learning outcomes in the cognitive domain.</span
... Perkembangan teknologi informasi dan komunikasi telah memberikan dampak yang begitu besar bagi kehidupan masyarakat sehingga dunia pendidikan sangat diuntungkan dengan adanya perkembangan teknologi tersebut. Perkembangan teknologi membawa serta tantangan dan peluang bagi dunia pendidikan, salah satunya adalah blended learning yang menggabungkan pengajaran online dan offline (Bryan & Volchenkova, 2016). Tujuan penggunaan teknologi dalam pembelajaran adalah untuk memberikan nilai kegunaan yang lebih baik yang diharapkan akan mempengaruhi hasil belajar. ...
... Beberapa alasan yang membuat pendidik mulai menerapkan model blended learning dalam proses pembelajaran salah satunya meningkatkan ketrampilan pedagogik peserta didik karena mereka memperoleh pengetahuan yang berbeda dari buku teks. Blended learning merupakan model pembelajaran yang efektif untuk digunakan karena merupakan bentuk transisi yang berangkat dari model pembelajaran tradisional, yaitu model pembelajaran yang terintegrasi dengan lingkungan dan sumber daya teknologi (Bryan & Volchenkova, 2016). Kombinasi metode pembelajaran yang berkaitan dengan interaksi tatap muka dan pembelajaran online merupakan blended learning (Crawford & Jenkins, 2017). ...
The purpose of this research is to find out the interests and learning outcomes of students through blended learning. This research is quantitative and descriptive. The subjects of this study were thirty-one students in the second semester of the Mathematics Education Study Program at Muhammadiyah University of Education, West Papua, Indonesia. Data collection techniques were carried out by tests and non-tests, and the instruments used were interest in learning questionnaires and learning achievement tests, as well as documentation. Learning outcomes in general indicate that the average student score is seventy-six, which indicates that the interpretation of student scores is "AB," or 3.50, and the average indicator of competency achievement in the overall integral calculus course is in the high category. The results of the total analysis of the interest in learning questionnaire obtained 90.91% results in the remarkably high category. The average percentage of each interest indicator is in the "very high" category range. The results of the study show that blended learning can arouse students' interest and attention and have a positive impact on learning outcomes, so when applying blended learning, all supporting components must be considered to create an optimal learning experience.
... Students are given work to complete within a certain period of time, and they do their work online at home. This is a face-to-face interaction between students and a lecturer, but it is executed online, and the lecturer becomes the facilitator (Bryan, 2016;Chowdhury, 2020). It was also paramount to find out the models that lecturers employed in their classrooms and their effectiveness. ...
Full-text available
The study reports on implementing blended learning and teaching in the post COVID-19 era at a University in Lesotho. Research indicates that COVID-19 has necessitated the adoption of blended teaching and learning across the entire education domain. This suggests that traditional face-to-face teaching approaches were no longer appropriate due to the restrictions imposed to curb the spread of coronavirus. Therefore, online teaching and learning became the only way lecturers in higher education, most especially in the selected University, could engage with their students. Therefore, the study sought to explore the implementation of blended teaching and learning in post COVID-19 at Limkokwing University. An interpretive paradigm was adopted in this study using a qualitative approach confined within a case study, and face-to-face interviews with lecturers (n=20) were used for data collection. Latent thematic analysis was the method used for analysing the emerging themes. Findings from interviews with lecturers reveal that blended teaching and learning is essential because it fosters learner-centredness through access to a plethora of electronic resources in several digital archives. Thus, the study recommends that blended teaching and learning should be adopted as a strategy for teaching and learning in Lesotho Universities.
... Over the past years, blended learning has emerged as a popular alternative to progress effectively in the transition from a traditional learning model to a model that integrates electronic environments and resources [1]. The meaning of the term "blended learning" has, however, been used ambiguously. ...
Full-text available
Blended learning is receiving more and more attention due to social changes, technological advances, and the increasing internationality of studies, and research needs to be carried out to explore the possibilities this instruction modality offers to university students. This project aimed to test the feasibility and success of a blended course on research and EFL skills and to determine whether there is an internationally shared criterion when assessing students’ scientific work. To do so, a short module on research skills was designed and implemented with 30 students from the BSc in Optics and Optometry from the Complutense University of Madrid, whose final project, the production of a scientific poster, was assessed by three instructors from different universities. The results show that the content and modality of the teaching were successful in the increase in students’ research and language skills. The assessment of the posters showed heterogeneous evaluations regarding the quality of their visual features and their contents. Therefore, more research is needed on international perspectives about the presentation of results in the academic and scientific genre to pursue the creation and dissemination of homogeneous criteria, and therefore improve students’ performance with an international value.
... Blended learning (BL) adalah konsep inovatif yang mengintegrasikan keunggulan pengajaran tradisional di kelas dan pembelajaran yang didukung teknologi informasi online (Lalima & Lata, 2017). Sementara itu, pembelajaran yang dimediasi oleh perpaduan komputer jaringan dan tatap muka (blended) dapat menciptakan pengalaman belajar yang lebih efektif, meningkatkan akses dan fleksibilitas, atau mengurangi biaya belajar (Bryan & Volchenkova, 2016) . Di samping itu pengembangan BL adalah pada bagaimana mendesain ulang strategi pembelajaran dan mencari cara paling efektif untuk menyampaikan materi pembelajaran secara online dan juga penggunaan teknologi yang efektif (Poon Poon, 2013) Pelajaran sains berisikan kerja ilmiah yang mewajibkan siswa mengalami proses saintifik secara langsung. ...
The Covid-19 pandemic has a significant impact on the quality of the science learning process. Online learning restricts students from directly interacting with science tools and materials. It takes effort from science educators to facilitate students in direct learning activities (hands on activity). This research is an attempt to facilitate students in learning by doing activities. In general, this study aims to provide a STEM project KIT that students can use in online-based junior high school science learning. Based on the results of the study in the analysis phase, the researcher has identified and designed three simple STEM projects that can be built as applications for the Dynamic Electricity concept. The three STEM projects are the Fruit Electric Energy Content Exploration Project, the Flood Alarm Model Making Project, and the Micro-Hydro Power Plant Model Building Project. For the purposes of these three student STEM projects, the researcher has built a KIT with stages including: tool and material selection, assembly, and expert validation. This research has produced a prototype of the Dynamic Electricity Application STEM Project KIT which is declared valid and feasible as a medium for junior secondary science learning, both for online and offline learning. Kata kunci: dynamic electrical applications, design and validation, STEM project KITs, online science learning ABSTRAK Pandemi Covid-19 memberikan dampak yang signifikan terhadap mutu proses pembelajaran IPA. Pembelajaran daring membatasi siswa sehingga tidak dapat berinteraksi secara langsung dengan alat-alat dan bahan IPA. Perlu usaha dari para pendidik IPA untuk memfasilitasi siswa dalam aktivitas belajar secara langsung (hands on activity). Penelitian ini merupakan salah satu usaha untuk memfasiltasi siswa dalam aktivitas learning by doing tersebut. Secara umum penelitian bertujuan menyediakan perangkat KIT proyek STEM yang dapat digunakan siswa dalam pembelajaran IPA SMP berbasis daring. Berdasarkan hasil kajian pada fasa analisis, peneliti telah mengidentifikasi dan mendesain tiga proyek STEM sederhana yang dapat dibangun sebagai aplikasi konsep Listrik Dinamis. Ketiga proyek STEM tersebut adalah Proyek Eksplorasi Kandungan Energi Listrik Buah-buahan, Proyek Pembuatan Model Alarm Banjir, dan Proyek Pembuatan Model Pembangkit Listrik Mikrohidro. Untuk keperluan ketiga proyek STEM siswa tersebut, peneliti telah membangun KIT dengan tahapan meliputi: pemilihan alat dan bahan, perakitan, dan validasi pakar. Penelitian ini telah menghasilkan sebuak prototype KIT Proyek STEM Aplikasi Listrik Dinamis yang dinyatakan sah dan layak sebagai media pembelajaran IPA SMP, baik untuk pembelajaran daring maupun luring. Kata kunci: aplikasi listrik dinamis, desain dan validasi, KIT proyek STEM, pembelajaran IPA daring
Full-text available
Di tahun 2021 menurunnya kasus covid-19 muncul kebijakan baru untuk melaksanakan pertemuan tatap muka terbatas. Berdasarkan Keputusan Bersama Menteri diketahui bahwa terdapat himbauan dan skema untuk mulai melaksanakan perkuliahan tatap muka terbatas (PTMT).UNESA mengeluarkan surat edaran yang menyatakan bahwa pembelajaran tatap muka terbatas dan bertahap (PTMTB) yang diselenggarakan oleh program studi dalam bentuk hybrid dengan teknik live streamingPenelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan kuantitatif dengan metode survey. Analisis data disajikan secara deskriptif kuantitatif. Subjek penelitian pada penelitian ini adalah Mahasiswa Program studi pendidikan ekonomi Universitas Negeri Surabaya dengan sampel berjumlah 50 Mahasiswa. Teknik pengumpulan data penelitian diperoleh dengan menggunakan kuesioner yang dibuat dengan menggunakan Google Form dan diisi oleh mahasiswa secara online. Kuesioner yang digunakan sebanyak 12 itemPersepsi mahasiswa pada mata kuliah matematika ekonomi menyatakan bahwa proses pembelajaran hybrid efektiv pada kualitas pembelajaran,penggunaan teknologi informasi,peningkatan hasil belajar,pemahaman konsep,kemandirian belajar,dan kombinasi antara offline dan online sedangkan tanggapan mahasiswa terhadap pembelajaran hybrid menyatakan bahwa pembelajaran berbasis teknologi penting,mendukung interaksi sosial, sebagai solusi keterbatasan pelayanan akademik,fasilitas pendukung yang dimiliki mahasiswa memenuhi,fasilitas yang disediakan kampus memenuhi,dan mahasiswa tertarik terhadap pembelajaran hybrid Mahasiswa menyatakan bahwa pembelajaran hybrid efektiv diselenggarakan pada mata kuliah matematika ekonomi meskipun ada beberapa mahasiswa yang memberikan respon negatif karena kendala teknis dan proses. Tanggapan mahasiswa terhadap pelaksanaan pembelajaran hybrid adalah mendukung dan bahkan sebagian besar lebih menyukai pembelajaran hybrid daripada pembelejaran secara online sepenuhnya ataupun offline sepenuhnya, meskipun beberapa mahasiswa tidak mendukung dikarenakan permasalahan dari sisi mereka sendiri.
Full-text available
Ilmu pengetahuan dan teknologi hadir sebagai upaya manusia untuk memenuhi berbagai kebutuhan dalam menjalani kehidupannya. Pandemi COVID-19 yang muncul di Indonesia pada awal tahuin 2020 mengharuskan masyarakatnya untuk hidup dengan menjaga jarak, karena penuaran virus tersebut dimungkinkan melalui kedekatan secara fisik. Kebijakan pemerintah untuk menjaga jarak sosial untuk menjaga kesehatan masyarakatnya, berdampak pada bidang ekonomi, sosial, budaya, ekonomi, pendidikan dll. Pemanfaatan teknologi merupakan terobosan untuk kegiatan belajar mengajar. Berbagai teknologi muncul untuk mengakomodasi berbagai aktivitas pembelajaran. Dengan kemampuan adaptasi yang tinggi masyarakat Indonesia bisa melaluinya dengan baik. Kini penyebaran Pandemi COVID-19 sudah menurun, bahkan mengarah pada endemi. Dengan metode penelitian dokumentasi dan wawancara, kami melakukan penelitian tentang pemanfaatan Iptek di era Pandemi COVID-19 dan keberlanjutannya di era Endemi 19. Ternyata pemanfaatan teknologi di era pandemi COVID-19 tetap dapat melengkapi dan menyempurnakan pekerjaan para pendidik setelah melakukan pembelajaran dengan tatap muka. Sebaliknya keberadaan guru juga menyempurnakan kelemahan iptek yang bersifat noninisiatif, tidak punya rasa dan tidak memiliki makna sentuhan.
Full-text available
This research aims to determine the components of student motivation in learning English with blended learning in class XI students at SMK HKBP Pematangsiantar. Therefore, the formulation of the problem in this study is "The difficulties of students in learning English, lack of vocabulary and lack of time in class XI students of SMK HKBP Pematangsiantar in understanding Blended Learning? And what is the cause of this error?” To find out the answer to the problem in this study, researchers used related theories, namely Diasti, K. S. (2020), Sari I. et all, (2018), The methodology used in this research is qualitative research and the questionnaire is a data collection technique. This is used to identify and describe the level of difficulty of students in learning students' English vocabulary. The data selected in this study were all students of class XI SMK Pariwisata HKBP Pematangsiantar, totaling 29 students. After the data was collected, the researcher found that there were four types of errors in writing students' descriptive texts, namely negligence, addition, misformation and misordering and there were four types of causes, namely difficulty understanding English, inappropriate timing (running out of chasing time assigned by the teacher) Thus it can be concluded that class XI students of SMK Pariwisata HKBP Pematangsiantar do not know how to increase motivation to learn English by using blended learning. Researchers suggest that teachers play a role in motivating students to be effective when teaching in class.
The author continues to review the attitude of students in the speciality “Library information activities” toward methods and formats of digital learning through distance education technologies. The students of educational institutions of the RF Ministry of Culture were surveyed. Three hundred and eighty three (383) bachelor-program students and 65 masters-to-be participated in the survey. The respondents specified the methods and format of digital learning introduced during the restriction pandemic period. It is demonstrated that after these emasures had been introduced, the intensity of utilization of digital learning methods and forms increased, as well as the ratio of the so-called external methods and forms, i. e. messengers and videoconference systems. It is established that the learners prefer the systems and/or services that they know and are used to. At the same time, the dynamics of moving toward solutions integrated into digital information education environment is demonstrated. The author argues that almost every digital information education environment features some kinds of external methods and forms of digital learning with distance education technologies. The results of their application can be preserved and replicated. To make their digital learning with distance education technologies more efficient, educational institutions have to minimize external systems and look into possibility of introducing mass open online courses.
Conference Paper
Full-text available
Сложившее состояние профессионального образования и динамичные изменения в социально-экономической среде требуют продолжения исследования возможностей совершенствования профессионального образования на региональном уровне. Возможным ответом на складывающиеся вызовы может стать концепция мультипрофессионального образования, предусматривающая большую гибкость в формах и средствах обучения, а также регулярные переподго-54 товку и повышение образования активного в трудовом отношении населения. В результате большинство индивидов будут способны к одновременной занятости по нескольким профессиям, либо к быстрому освоению и успешной работе в новых для себя профессиях.
Full-text available
This paper is in two parts. Firstly it attempts to create a definition of blended learning. It argues that blended learning need not be seen as the province of technical experts or of distance-learning students. Blended learning is simply the effective combination of different modes of delivery, models of teaching and styles of learning. The paper goes on to outline the development of a part-time degree in Information Technology using blended learning. The experience of this development and subsequent implementation may be of value elsewhere in genuinely encouraging widening participation in higher education. Introduction This paper is written in the midst of the debate about the government target that 50% of 18-30 year-olds should attend higher education. This is accompanied by the second debate concerning University fees. In spite of the fact that the Government White Paper 'The Future of Higher Education' (DfES 2003) discusses their cause, part-time students are largely lost in the debate. The British workforce is filled with millions who left school when less than 20% of the population attended higher education. Many of these workers require qualifications to progress in work and are keen and willing to pay. The level of their fees is exempt from Government rules. They must be included in genuine efforts to widen participation and the University of Salford is well placed to achieve this. The University has a long and proud history of part-time study, and providing for the needs of industry in the northwest. The provision of such programmes is an essential part of the University's mission. This paper argues that blended learning is especially suitable for part-time students and for the University.
Full-text available
The main objective of the article is to contribute to an understanding of the value of blended learning within the scope of new paradigm in Russian higher education. We consider blended learning as a unique approach that aims to solve a series of tasks connected with the necessity of raising education quality. Such competences as self-organization, knowledge management, the ways of getting and processing it are brought to the forefront. The article analyzes the didactic capacity of blended learning as the means to implement the effective transition from a traditional learning model to an integrated one where electronic environments and resources are widely used. The existing blended learning models are considered and the ways of their adaptation towards the requirements of the Russian higher education system are discussed with the focus on the course “foreign language”.
Full-text available
The authors make the case that implementation of a successful blended learning program requires alignment of institutional, faculty, and student goals. Reliable and robust infrastructure must be in place to support students and faculty. Continuous evaluation can effectively track the impact of blended learning on students, faculty, and the institution. These data are used to inform stakeholders and impact policy to improve faculty development and other support structures necessary for success. This iterative loop of continuous quality improvement is augmented by faculty scholarship of teaching and learning research. The evolution of blended learning at the University of Central Florida is used as a model and research collected over sixteen years illustrates that with proper support and planning, blended learning can result in positive institutional transformation.
Full-text available
Although the term ‘blended learning’ is widely used, this article argues against it. Two arguments are advanced. The first is primarily philosophical, although it has several pragmatic implications. It proposes that ‘blending’ either relies on the idea of dichotomies which are suspect within the context of learning with technology or else becomes ineffective as a discriminating concept and is thus without purpose. The implication of this is that the term ‘blended’ should either be abandoned or, at the least, radically reconceived. The second argument proposes that learning, from the perspective of the learner, is rarely, if ever, the subject of blended learning. What is actually being addressed are forms of instruction, teaching, or at best, pedagogies. The implication of this is that the term ‘learning’ should be abandoned. The second half of the article attempts to redeem the concept of blended learning by arguing that learning gains attributed to blended learning may have their explanation in variation theory. It offers a new way to conceptualise what is being ‘blended’ that is theoretically coherent, philosophically defensible and pragmatically informative. The article concludes by setting an agenda for further work in this area.
The purpose this article is to describe an institutional initiative created to support faculty engaged in blended course redesign. This Inquiry Through Blended Learning (ITBL) program adapted Garrison, Anderson, and Archer's (2000) Community of Inquiry framework in order to provide faculty participants with a guided inquiry process for discussing and reflecting on key redesign questions, exploring blended learning from a student perspective, integrating the new experiences and ideas, and then applying this knowledge through the implementation of a course redesigned for blended learning. An overview of the ITBL program, the methods used to evaluate the redesigned courses, the findings, and conclusions are presented in this article.
The term "community of practice" is of relatively recent coinage, even though the phenomenon it refers to is age-old. The concept has turned out to provide a useful perspective on knowing and learning. A growing number of people and organizations in various sectors are now focusing on communities of practice as a key to improving their performance. This brief and general introduction examines what communities of practice are and why researchers and practitioners in so many different contexts find them useful as an approach to knowing and learning.
Conference Paper
After the initial e-learning hype with all its hopes and expectations on successful learning through the support of technical achievements, now blended learning is becoming the promising learning concept. Bearing the experiences with e-learning in mind, teachers and learners alike are more cautious regarding their hopes. Nevertheless the idea of hybrid or blended learning, combining the best of several learning concepts, is indeed intriguing. But what is blended learning? It is important to acknowledge that "blended learning means different things to different people" (Discroll 2002) and therefore it is necessary to give a definition, whenever a concept of blended learning is discussed. In this paper, blended learning is defined as the combination of technology supported self or distance study settings and face-to-face settings. Regarding this definition, what is the best of the different learning concepts, that makes blended learning a successful concept? There are more and more empirical studies which try to give an answer. This paper proposes five assumptions on this question, which have a didactical emphasis and include the results of some recent empirical studies on this matter.
Conference Paper
Achieving the widespread adoption of Hybrid Learning in Higher Education is desirable but difficult and to accomplish this requires significant institutional change. This paper suggests that this kind of change can be achieved by the strategic harnessing of Distributed Learning opportunities. It takes as its main point of focus the lecture which, despite significant advances in communication and information technology still prevails as a dominant teaching and learning strategy in Higher Education. It suggests that using screencasting to deliver lectures in a Distributed Learning context can trigger the kind of widespread change required.