Year 2020, Volume 21 , Issue 4, Pages 1 - 13 2020-10-01

EXPLORING BLENDED LEARNING RELATIONSHIPS IN HIGHER EDUCATION USING A SYSTEMS-BASED FRAMEWORK

Elisabeth MCGEE [1] , Prerna POOJARY [2]


The adoption of a blended learning approach is increasing among higher education institutions with a significant amount of research that focuses on linear relationships. However, there is limited research on how the blended learning environment functions and interacts as a complex system. There is a need for more research that explores the relationships that exist within a blended learning environment using a system-based framework, such as the Complex Adaptive Blended Learning Systems (CABLS) framework. The purpose of this qualitative phenomenological study was to explore the perceived relationships that exist within the CABLS in a higher education blended learning environment. Interviews were conducted with the learner, teacher, institutional administrators, and learning support staff. A thematic analysis was used to identify themes to better understand stakeholder relationships within the CABLS framework. The results of this study seek to provide all stakeholders with a better understanding of the complex interdependent relationships within the CABLS framework to optimize a collaborative approach to blended learning.
Blended learning, higher education, complex adaptive systems, framework, stakeholders, relationships
  • Boelens, R., De Wever, B., & Voet, M. (2017). Four key challenges to the design of blended learning: a systematic literature review. Educational Research Review, 22, 1–18.
  • Cleveland, J. (1994). Complexity theory: Basic concepts and application to systems thinking. Innovation Network for Communities, 27.
  • Creswell, J. W. & Creswell, J.D. (2018). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications
  • Creswell, J. & Poth, C. (2017). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications
  • Evenhouse, D., Patel, N., Gerschutz, M., Stites, N. A., Rhoads, J. F., Berger, E., & DeBoer, J. (2018). Perspectives on pedagogical change: Instructor and student experiences of a newly implemented undergraduate engineering dynamics curriculum. European Journal of Engineering Education, 43 (5), 664–678.
  • Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7 (2), 95–105.
  • Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2013). Institutional change and leadership associated with blended learning innovation: Two case studies. The Internet and Higher Education, 18, 24–28.
  • Graham, C. R., & Robison, R. (2007). Chapter 5: Realizing the Transformational Potential of Blended Learning: Comparing Cases of Transforming Blends and Enhancing Blends in Higher Education. In, Blended Learning: Research Perspectives (pp. 83-110).
  • Graham, C. R., Woodfield, W., & Harrison, J. B. (2013). A framework for institutional adoption and implementation of blended learning in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 18, 4–14.
  • Guest, G., A. Bunce, & L. Johnson. 2006. How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18, 59–82. Hamilton, E. (2015). Advancing a complex systems approach to personalized learning communities: Bandwidth, sightlines, and teacher generativity. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 26(1), 89–104.
  • Hew, K.F. & Lo, C.K. (2018). Flipped classroom improves student learning in health professions education: A meta-analysis. BMC Medical Education, 18 (38), 1-12. doi: 10.1186/s12909-018-1144-z
  • Holmes, K. A., & Prieto-Rodriguez, E. (2018). Student and staff perceptions of a learning management system for blended learning in teacher education. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 43 (3), 21–34.
  • Horn, M. B., & Fisher, J. F. (2017). New faces of blended learning. Educational Leadership, 74 (6), 59–63.
  • Kumar, R., & Pande, N. (2017). Technology-mediated learning paradigm and the blended learning ecosystem: what works for working professionals? Procedia Computer Science, 122, 1114–1123. doi:10.1016/j.procs.2017.11.481
  • Lincoln, Y.S., Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Liu, Q., Peng, W., Zhang, F., Hu, R., Li, Y., & Yan, W. (n.d.). The Effectiveness of blended learning in health professions: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 18 (1). doi:10.2196/jmir.4807
  • Manwaring, K. C., Larsen, R., Graham, C. R., Henrie, C. R., & Halverson, L. R. (2017). Investigating student engagement in blended learning settings using experience sampling and structural equation modeling. The Internet and Higher Education, 35, 21–33.
  • Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., & Baki, M. (2013). The effectiveness of online and blended learning: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Teachers College Record, 115 (3), 1-47.
  • Moustakas, C. E. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications, Inc.
  • NaliakaMukhale, P., & Hong, Z. (2017). Towards improvement of student learning outcomes: An assessment of the professional development needs of lecturers at Kenyan universities. Journal of Education and Practice, 8 (12), 151–158.
  • Ravitch, S. M., & Carl, N. M. (2016). Qualitative research: Bridging the conceptual, theoretical, and methodological. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  • Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  • Saldana, J. (2016). 3rd ed. The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  • Smith, K., & Hill, J. (2019). Defining the nature of blended learning through its depiction in current research. Higher Education Research and Development, 38(2), 383–397.
  • Tamim, R. M. (2018). Blended Learning for Learner Empowerment: Voices from the Middle East. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 50 (1), 70–83.
  • Thurab-Nkhosi, D. (2018). Implementing a blended/online learning policy on a face-to-face campus: Perspectives of administrators and implications for change. Journal of Learning for Development, 5(2), 133–147.
  • VanDerLinden, K. (2014). Blended learning as transformational institutional learning. New Directions for Higher Education, 2014 (165), 75–85.
  • Waldrop, M. M. (1992). Complexity: The Emerging Science at the Edge of Order and Chaos. London, UK: Viking Publication.
  • Wang, Y., Han, X., & Yang, J. (2015). Revisiting the blended learning literature: Using a complex adaptive systems framework. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 18 (2), 380.
  • Zanin-Yost, A. & Dillen, C. (2019). Connecting past to future needs: Nursing faculty and librarian collaboration to support students’ academic success. Journal of Library Administration, 59 (1), 45–58. doi:10.1080/01930826.2018.1549407
Primary Language en
Subjects Social
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Orcid: 0000-0002-4101-763X
Author: Elisabeth MCGEE (Primary Author)
Institution: Center for Innovative Clinical Practice University of St. Augustine for Health Sciences St. Augustine, FL, USA
Country: United States


Orcid: 0000-0001-5685-6383
Author: Prerna POOJARY
Institution: College of Public Health and Health Professions University of Florida Gainesville, FL, USA
Country: United States


Dates

Application Date : July 30, 2019
Acceptance Date : October 22, 2020
Publication Date : October 1, 2020

APA Mcgee, E , Poojary, P . (2020). EXPLORING BLENDED LEARNING RELATIONSHIPS IN HIGHER EDUCATION USING A SYSTEMS-BASED FRAMEWORK . Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education , 21 (4) , 1-13 . DOI: 10.17718/tojde.803343