The readings on blended learning are really interesting. The papers show that researchers are attempting to set down guidelines and rationales for practices in blended learning as a fairly new and emerging field. There are a fair amount of publications promoting various ideals for education in general which are used to try and define the rules for blended learning. There is something revealed in this literature that is troubling to me. While there are various models of what "good" education should look like, it seems that there is very little research to show why that education should be done in a face to face environment. If this is the case, then what is the foundation for the argument that education should be blended? Where is the basis for stating that some of the educational process should be face to face? I can imagine that researchers who are fully committed to the distance learning as a solution may question the value of blended learning. They may well say that all educational design principles can be acheived in a fully online environment, and there would be little in the way of research showing the distinct value of close priximity face to face education to stand in the way of that argument. Do we just have a universal agreement that face to face education is a good thing? Where is the data to show that it is? If blended learning really is a good thing, do we not need to produce better data that shows why the face to face part of it is of absolute necessity? If we can't do that, then why have blended at all? Just go for fully online.
I am not sure if I have explained my thoughts very well, but I would appreciate some discussion.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Mike - we certainly take much for granted in face-to-face settings and assume that it is the best way to do things. I don't necessarily agree with the assumption . . . however, I don't agree with the assumption that it is all best done in an online environment either. I think that more dialog is necessary to better understand how the affordances, constraints, and goals of different learning environments have an impact on the design of those environments.
ReplyDeleteI think this week's readings help point out the distinction that may help you identify what each environment (medium?) is best at: reflection vs. dialog. Now this assumes a lot about what is important in learning. I'm sure that Behaviorist would say that neither of those things are important. It does, nonetheless, provide a clear rationale for thinking about what each environment might be most suited for. Just my 2 cents.
ReplyDeleteMike I can tell that you have high faith in the power of video conferencing! I have to admit that I am a little skeptical because having done a little video conferencing in my day and I have not always found the close connection that you have written about. I wonder how much of this is dependent on the teacher/student. For example, if you have a teacher who is really adept and passionate about conferencing with students in a certain manner that teacher will make it work and get high ratings. But take the same "technique" with a different teacher and there could easily be different results. I'm wondering if it's somewhat the same thing with blended learning in general. That there is not "one right way" but a contextual right way depending on the needs/wants of the students and the teacher.
ReplyDelete