Using Blended Learning in Postgraduate Applied Statistics Programs

Yıl 2019, Cilt: 20 Sayı: 2, 64 - 77, 01.04.2019

Jahar Bhowmık Denny Meyer Brian Phıllıps

https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.557739

Cited By: 2

Öz

Blended learning refers to a method of teaching and learning in which some form of online learning is used in addition to the traditional on-campus/face-to-face learning experience in an integrated manner. Postgraduate Applied Statistics programs at Swinburne University of Technology, Australia adopted the blended learning paradigm almost a decade ago to accommodate an increasingly diverse student population. This paradigm allows for flexibility in design approaches, and accommodates the range of blended learning capabilities and experience of teachers and learners. The blended learning design adopted in these programs has involved the thoughtful integration of learning and teaching approaches in both on-campus, face-to-face and online/virtual learning environments by utilising the benefits of each of these environments. These programs focus on designing learning interactions across formal teaching spaces, informal learning spaces and online learning and teaching spaces. This flexible approach has been well accepted among both online and on-campus students. This paper describes the medium impact blended learning model adopted in these courses and the feedback received from students during recent study periods. The authors make the case that implementation of a successful blended learning model can enhance students’ learning experience for a mixed cohort of participants.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Blended learning, post graduate, applied statistics, online teaching activities, virtual learning environment, Blackboard, echo recording, impact, discussion board

Kaynakça

• Ambient Insight (2011). Learning and performance technology research taxonomy. Monroe, WA: Ambient Insight. http://www.ambientinsight.com/Resources/Documents/ AmbientInsight_Learning_Technology_Taxonomy.pdf Alammary, A., Sheard, J., & Carbone, A. (2014). Blended learning in higher education: Three different design approaches. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 30(4), 440-454. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.693 Allam, C. (2006) in Bijnens, M., Vanbuel, M., Verstegen, S., & Young C., Handbook on Digital Video and Audio in Education, Creating and using audio and video material for educational purposes. The Videoaktiv Project. DOI: https://elbd.sites.uu.nl/wpcontent/uploads/sites/108/2017/05/2184_9_VideoAktivHandbookfin.pdf Aycock, A., Garnham, C., & Kaleta, R. (2002). Lessons learned from the hybrid course project. Teaching with Technology Today, 8(6). DOI: https://hccelearning.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/lessons-learned-from-the-hybrid-course-project.pdf Bhowmik, J., Meyer, D., & Phillips, B. (2016). Blended Learning in Postgraduate Applied Statistics Programs. Proceedings: OZCOTS 2016, Canberra, Australia, 83-88. DOI: http://iase-web.org/Publications.php?p=Regional_Publications Biggs, J. (1999). Teaching for Quality Learning at University, SHRE and Open University Press. Biggs, J. (2003). Teaching for quality learning at university: what the student does, 2nd Edition, Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press, UK. Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university, 4th Edition, Open University Press,UK. Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain. Addison-Wesley Longman Ltd. USA. Bloom, B.S. (Ed.). Engelhart, M.D., Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H., Krathwohl, D.R. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook I: The Cognitive Domain. New York: David McKay Co Inc. Bloxham, S., & Boyd, P. (2007). Developing effective assessment in higher education: A practical guide. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Brooks, D. C. (2016). ECAR Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology. Research report. Louisville, CO: ECAR. https://er.educause.edu/~/media/files/library/2016/10/ers1605.pdf?la=en Chen, W., & Looi, C. (2007). Incorporating online discussion in face to fact classroom learning: A new blended learning approach. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 23, 307-326. Dahlstrom, E., & Bichsel, J. (2014). Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology.http://www.educause.edu/library/resources/ecar-study-undergraduate-students-and information-technology-2013. Duhaney, D. C. (2004). Blended learning in education, training, and development. Performance Improvement, 43(8), 35-38. Ghahari, S. (2013). The Effect of Blended Learning vs. Classroom Learning Techniques on Iranian EFL Learners’ Writing. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching & Research, 1(3, 1-9. Gibbs, G., & Simpson, C. (2004). Conditions under which assessment supports learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 1(1), 3-31. Guo, P.J., Kim, J., & Rubin, R. (2014). How video affects student engagement: An empirical study of MOOC videos. L&S March 4-5 2014, Atlanta, Georgia. DOI: http://up.csail.mit.edu/other-pubs/las2014-pguo-engagement.pdf Harris, L. R., Brown, G. T. L., & Harnett, J. A. (2014). Understanding classroom feedback practices: A study of New Zealand student experiences, perceptions, and emotional responses. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 26(2), 107-133. Kaleta, R., Skibba, K., & Joosten, T. (2007). Discovering, designing, and delivering hybrid courses. In A. G. Picciano & C. D. Dziuban (Eds.). Blended learning research perspective (pp. 111-143). Needham, MA: Sloan-C. Krathwohl, D.R., Bloom, B.S., & Masia, B.B. (1973). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, the Classification of Educational Goals. Handbook II: Affective Domain. New York: David McKay Co., Inc. Kember, D., & McNaught, C. (2007). Enhancing University Teaching: Lessons from Research into Award Winning Teachers, Abingdon, Oxfordshire: Routledge, UK. Lunt, T., & Curran, J. (2010). ‘Are you listening please?’ The advantages of electronic audio feedback compared to written feedback. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(7), 759-769. 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, 1-47. Moskal, P., Dziuban, C., & Hartman, J. (2013). Blended learning: A dangerous idea? Internet and Higher Education, 18, 15-23. Norberg, A., Dziuban, C.D., & Moskal, P.D. (2011). A time-based blended learning model. On The Horizon, 19 (3), 207-216. Oliver, M., & Trigwell, K. (2005). Can ‘Blended Learning’ Be Redeemed? E–Learning, 2(1), 17-26. Park, S. Y. (2009). An Analysis of the Technology Acceptance Model in Understanding University Students' Behavioral Intention to Use e-Learning. Educational Technology & Society, 12 (3), 150–162. Prosser, M., & Trigwell, K. (1999). Understanding learning and teaching: The experience in higher education. Buckingham: SRHE & Open University Press. Sharpe, R., Benfield, G., Roberts, G., & Francis, R. (2006). The undergraduate experience of blended e-learning: A review of UK literature and practice. https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/system/files/sharpe_benfield_roberts_francis_0.pdf Simpson E.J. (1972). The Classification of Educational Objectives in the Psychomotor Domain. Washington, DC: Gryphon House. Tishkoveskaya, S., & Lancaster, G.A. (2012). Statistical Education in the 21st Century: a Review of Challenges, Teaching Innovations and Strategies for Reform. Journal of Statistics Education, 20 (2), 1-56.