Blended instructional practice: A review of the empirical literature on instructors' adoption and use of online tools in face-to-face teaching

Brown, Michael G.

doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2016.05.001

Cited by 179 publications

(129 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

110

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Both the student context (e.g., campus-based or distance learners) and cohort sizes are likely to be decisive factors. Blended learning is perceived by academic staff as being more time consuming (Brown, 2016), although we could not find any empirical evidence to confirm or refute this perception; nor were any studies identified comparing preparation time for single format face-to-face vs. online sessions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 74%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Systematic Review of Information Literacy Programs in Higher Education: Effects of Face-to-Face, Online, and Blended Formats on Student Skills and Views

Weightman¹,

Farnell²,

Morris³

et al. 2017

EBLIP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

212017 Weightman, Farnell, Morris, Strange, and Hallam. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons-Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike License 4.0 International (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly attributed, not used for commercial purposes, and, if transformed, the resulting work is redistributed under the same or similar license to this one. AbstractObjective -Evidence from systematic reviews a decade ago suggested that face-to-face and online methods to provide information literacy training in universities were equally effective in terms of skills learnt, but there was a lack of robust comparative research. The objectives of this review were (1) to update these findings with the inclusion of more recent primary research; (2) to further enhance the summary of existing evidence by including studies of blended formats (with components of both online and face-to-face teaching) compared to single format education; and (3) to explore student views on the various formats employed.Methods -Authors searched seven databases along with a range of supplementary search methods to identify comparative research studies, dated January 1995 to October 2016, exploring skill outcomes for students enrolled in higher education programs. There were 33 studies included, of which 19 also contained comparative data on student views. Where feasible, metaanalyses were carried out to provide summary estimates of skills development and a thematic analysis was completed to identify student views across the different formats.Results -A large majority of studies (27 of 33; 82%) found no statistically significant difference between formats in skills outcomes for students. Of 13 studies that could be included in a metaanalysis, the standardized mean difference (SMD) between skill test results for face-to-face versus online formats was -0.01 (95% confidence interval -0.28 to 0.26). Of ten studies comparing blended to single delivery format, seven (70%) found no statistically significant difference between formats, and the remaining studies had mixed outcomes. From the limited evidence available across all studies, there is a potential dichotomy between outcomes measured via skill test and assignment (course work) which is worthy of further investigation. The thematic analysis of student views found no preference in relation to format on a range of measures in 14 of 19 studies (74%). The remainder identified that students perceived advantages and disadvantages for each format but had no overall preference.Conclusions -There is compelling evidence that information literacy training is effective and well received across a range of delivery formats. Further research looking at blended versus single format methods, and the time implications for each, as well as comparing assignment to skill test outcomes would be valuable. Future studies should adopt a methodologically robus...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 74%

“…The potential benefits of blended teaching include the effective use of class time, more active learning, allowance of individual learning styles, and speed (Arnold-Garza 2014). Such techniques are increasingly being used across academic settings, suggesting that these will become the 'new traditional model [s]' (Brown, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Systematic Review of Information Literacy Programs in Higher Education: Effects of Face-to-Face, Online, and Blended Formats on Student Skills and Views

Weightman¹,

Farnell²,

Morris³

et al. 2017

EBLIP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is not surprising as Torrisi-Steele and Drew (2013) found that of the literature addressing issues related to academic practice, five per cent of the 827 articles were about blended learning in HE. The focus is on students' experiences, perspectives, and outcomes in blended education (Brown, 2016). Notably, Ross, Sinclair, Knox, Bayne, and Macleod argue in their position paper that "the current ways of writing and talking about MOOCs are not adequately addressing the complexity of the teacher's role" (2014, p. 66).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Higher Education Lecturers’ Lived Experience of Going Public in MOOCs

Olsson

2017

Open Praxis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Academics in higher education are used to having their research publications reviewed and openly scrutinized. Teaching in higher education has traditionally been an individual academic's activity that has taken place in a closed classroom. However, the introduction of open education, particularly massive open online courses (MOOCs) has challenged this. In MOOCs, lectures are recorded and made public for thousands of course participants to view. This study investigates, via semi-structured interviews, how 20 lecturers of 10 MOOCs at six Swedish Universities have experienced this. All have joined the projects voluntarily, but a few have done so with some ambivalence. For them, standing in front of the camera, publishing material and, to some extent, losing control of the course content was scary at the beginning of the projects. Overall, the lecturers overcame this and thought that it was a good opportunity to reach many students, as well as a way to keep up with the changing requirements for teaching in higher education.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Notably, Ross, Sinclair, Knox, Bayne, and Macleod argue in their position paper that "the current ways of writing and talking about MOOCs are not adequately addressing the complexity of the teacher's role" (2014, p. 66). A small number of studies have explored staff attitudes towards OER (Brown, 2016). This deficiency is also manifested by the distribution of suggested research topics submitted to the MOOC Research Initiative (MRI) 2013, funded by the Gates Foundation, and administered by Athabasca University.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%