Research roundup: 4 new reports on what’s working for blended-learning practitioners — from christenseninstitute.org by Luis Flores

Excerpt:

At the start of the year, we published a blog post on interesting research from 2017 related to innovative approaches to school design. Even though we aren’t even half-way through 2018, there are already several insightful reports on blended and personalized learning from this year that are worth highlighting.

These reports examined various tools and approaches to implement blended and personalized learning models, as well as the potential impact these models could have on students and teachers. From examining how schools implemented their models sustainably to recommending methods to best support teachers, these are informative reports for anyone interested in implementing blended and personalized learning models in their schools.

1. Digital math tool produces gains in student achievement
2. Personalized learning can be implemented sustainably
3. PD-rich blended-learning plans increase chances of success
4. Ensure that teachers create, and design strategies for, their goals

 

 

 

 

From DSC:
The simpler something is, the greater chance that it will be adopted. Think of HTML and how simple it was years ago for people to create and post their own web pages. I would argue that it was that level of simplicity that lead to the explosive growth of the World Wide Web. 

So when we look at what the term “flipped learning” or the “flipped classroom” is all about these days, I think we need to be careful that things don’t get too complex. Consider the growing complexity of the flipped classroom out at flr.flglobal.org/?p=417

Version 1.0 was easy to understand and therefore to implement. But Version 3.0 looks far less clear as to what we’re even talking about now. We need to find ways to keep it simple, if that’s possible. I realize that teaching and learning is messy, so I’m not sure it’s always possible to practice the KISS principle when we’re talking about pedagogies. But if we don’t try, we’ll have a harder time getting adoption in the future — because Instructional Designers, Teachers, Trainers, and Professors won’t even know what we’re talking about.

 

 

 

Robert Talbert gets at some of this too in his posting entitled, “Four challenges for flipped learning for the next five years.”  Below is an excerpt from that posting:

1. Build a standard operational definition of flipped learning.
One of the biggest challenges facing flipped learning is simply defining what it is. Several competing definitions, all with some overlap but also with nagging differences, are in use today, and this is making it all but impossible to conduct or interpret research on flipped learning or practice it with students. It’s to the point that if you hear an instructor say she uses “flipped learning”, you have to dig deeper to know what she really means.

So as the first challenge, and as a prerequisite to the others, I propose that somehow, we all come up with an operational definition of flipped learning that can serve as the standard for research and practice. I’ve already proposed my own. I’m not saying this should be the standard, but I think something like this could be the starting point. How will “we” decide on a standard, and who’s the “we”? I don’t know, but I think it will involve some group of people a high profile to lead the discussion and decide on one, and then start using it and labeling it as “the standard definition”.

Can other people use models of flipped learning, such as the in-class flipped model, that don’t conform to a standard definition? Sure. Who’s going to stop them? But we need a starting point

 

 

FLGI Publishes the Top 100 Educators Leading Flipped Learning in 2018
The Flipped Learning Global Initiative identifies the movement’s leading educators, administrators, and technologists worldwide

CHICAGO, April 16, 2018 /PRNewswire/ — Today, the Flipped Learning Global Initiative (FLGI), a worldwide coalition of educators, researchers, technologists, professional development providers and education leaders, announced the publication of the FLGI 100. The annual list identifies the top 100 K-12 educators who are driving the adoption of the flipped classroom around the world.  The list is compiled by the FLGI executive committee – led by Jon Bergmann, Chief Academic Officer and one of the pioneers of the flipped classroom movement. Educators from around the globe are represented, including Flipped Learning practitioners from Brazil, Australia, New Zealand, Italy, China, Taiwan, Spain, the United Kingdom, Turkey, Italy, Korea, Argentina, Iceland, Sweden, India and the United States. FLGI also identified the top 50 Flipped Learning leaders in higher education and the top 50 Flipped Learning administrators and tech coaches worldwide.

“The global Flipped Learning community continues to grow, introducing us to fresh ideas, new innovations, and emerging leaders. The 2018 FLGI Flipped Learning leaders lists include veterans from prior years, and many new names and faces. The FLGI 100 list, along with the two FLGI 50 lists, represent the practitioners who are showing us the connection between Flipped Learning, active learning, and world-class learners,” said Jon Bergmann.

The FLGI Flipped Learning leaders lists are updated annually, and all three lists are published in the April issue of Flipped Learning Review (FLR): the Flipped Learning 3.0 magazine. FLR is the first digital magazine dedicated to covering the ideas and people driving the global Flipped Learning movement. The issue features an insightful interview with one of the leading voices in the Flipped Learning community: Dr. Eric Mazur at Harvard University. Bergmann and Mazur discuss how Flipped Learning has evolved over the last decade and why group space mastery is the next frontier for this instructional model.  The April issue also includes the full list of global delegates participating in the project to establish international standards for Flipped Learning. The 2018 FLGI 100 list, the Bergmann/Mazur interview, and the global delegates lists are accessible at http://flr.flglobal.org/

About the Flipped Learning Global Initiative
The Flipped Learning Global Initiative, (FLGI), was created to support the rapidly expanding adoption of Flipped Learning all over the world in countries including China, Taiwan, Spain, UAE, the United Kingdom, Turkey, Italy, Korea, Argentina, Iceland, Sweden, India and the United States. FLGI aims to fill the growing global need for collaboration across borders in three domains: evolving best practices in Flipped Learning, research curation and distribution, and technology selection and implementation.

FLGI serves as a global hub for coordinating, orchestrating and scaling the key elements required to expand Flipped Learning successfully around the world.  FLGI is home to the Flipped Learning International Faculty, the Flipped Learning Innovation Center, the Flipped Learning Global Standards project, and Flipped Learning Review (FLR).

For more information, contact: Errol St.Clair Smith, Director of Global Development at 949-677-7381, 193454@email4pr.com or go to www.flglobal.org.

 


Also see this page, which states:

On Monday, April 16, 2018 The Flipped Learning Global Initiative (FLGI) will publish the 2018 FLGI 100. The annual list identifies the top 100 K-12 educators who are driving the adoption of Flipped Learning around the world.  The list is compiled by the FLGI executive committee, led by Jon Bergmann, Chief Academic Officer. Educators from around the globe are represented, including Flipped Learning practitioners from Italy, China, Taiwan, Spain, UAE, the United Kingdom, Turkey, Italy, Korea, Argentina, Iceland, Sweden, India, and the United States. The initiative also identified the top 50 Flipped Learning leaders in higher education and the top 50 Flipped Learning administrators and tech coaches.

 


 

 

 

The Case for Inclusive Teaching — from chronicle.com by Kevin Gannon

Excerpt:

Inclusive teaching is not condescending or fake. Rather, it’s a realization that traditional pedagogical methods — traditionally applied — have not served all of our students well. It’s a commitment to put actual substance behind our cheerful declarations that all students deserve access to higher education. Mumbling about “snowflakes” accomplishes nothing but further entrenching ineffective and unskillful practices. The beauty of inclusive pedagogy is that, rather than making special accommodations that would decrease equity, it actually benefits all students, not just those at whose needs it was originally aimed.

So what is inclusive pedagogy? It is a mind-set, a teaching-and-learning worldview, more than a discrete set of techniques. But that mind-set does value specific practices which, research suggests, are effective for a mix of students. More specifically:

It values course design. Inclusive teaching asks us to critically examine not just the way we teach on a day-to-day basis, but the prep work and organization we do before the course begins. Does our course design — including assigned readings, assessments, and daily activities — reflect a diverse array of identities and perspectives? Am I having my students read a bunch of monographs, all authored by white males, for example? And if I am, what am I telling students about how knowledge is produced in my field, and more important, about who is producing it?

Even such quotidian practices as in-class videos or case studies ought to be examined. What types of people do my students see when they watch a video featuring an expert in my discipline? Do the experts look like my students? In my teaching, am I mostly relying on one pedagogical method, where I might be able to connect with a wider array of students by differentiating the types of instruction I use? What assumptions am I making about my students’ prior experiences and educational opportunities when I ask questions in class or design my exams?

It values discernment.

It values a sense of belonging.

 

 

 

 

Implications of Learning Theories on Instructional Design — from elearningindustry.com by Jon-Erik Oleyar-Reynolds
Are you interested in becoming an Instructional Designer? Or are you just starting out in the world of learning theories? The focus of this article is to inform the reader of 3 unique learning theories while discussing the implications they have had in the field of Instructional Design (ID).

Excerpt:

Behaviorist Learning Theory
Behavioral learning theory can be summarized as learning that occurs through the behavioral response to environmentally sourced stimuli. The foundation of this theory is built upon assumptions that “have little regard for the cognitive processing of the learner involved in the task”.

The focus of behavioral learning theory resides in the use of reinforcement to drive behavior. Instructional Design can benefit from the use of reinforcement as a means to train learners to complete instructional objectives that are presented to them.

Cognitive Learning Theory
The primary focus of learning is on the development of knowledge by the creation of schemas. Schemas are like catalogs of information that can be used to identify concepts or experiences through a complex set of relationships that are connected to one another. In short, the catalogs act like a database of knowledge for the learner. 2 prominent theories that will be discussed are Gestalt theory and information processing theory; these 2 have paved the way for cognitivism and its impact on the field of Instructional Design.

Information processing theory further supports cognitive learning theory. Similar to Gestalt theory, the focus of learning is on the individual. The processing of information by the learner is similar to the way a computer processes information. The memory system is broken into 3 stages based on this approach:

  • Sensory memory
  • Working memory
  • Long-term memory

…the working memory may require more rehearsal to establish a clear connection to the concept and store it in long-term.

One of the most widely used strategies could arguably be a rehearsal. The expression “practice makes perfect” may seem cliché, but it does fit very well when discussing cognition and development. As one rehearses, the working memory is exercised.

While working memory has a limit of 7 (plus or minus 2), creating a chunk of information increases the amount that can be worked with.

Instructional Design shifted in the presence of cognitivism and includes a more system-like design approach with a focus on the learners.

 

Social Learning Theory
Social learning theory focuses on the impact of learning based on factors related to the social environment. In other words, learning occurs in the context of a social situation that the learner is placed in.

Self-Efficacy
Think of the expression “perhaps it rubbed off on me”. This has a direct relationship to social learning theory. Self-efficacy can be influenced by the design of lessons that allow for learners to view others of similar ability succeeding at instructional tasks. This could be achieved in a number of creative ways, but generally is most effective in collaborative activities where learners work in small groups. Overall, self-efficacy is the belief that one can be successful at particular tasks.

Collaborative learning groups and the use of peer review are widely used in many settings in which learning occurs.

 

 

From DSC:
I wanted to briefly relay an example that relates to the Cognitive Learning/Processing Theory — and more specifically to a concept known as Cognitive Load.  The other day I was sitting at the kitchen table, trying to read an interesting blog posting. But at the very same time, the radio was (loudly) relaying an item re: Virtual Reality (VR) — which also caught my ear and interest.

Which “channel” do I focus on? My visual channel or my auditory channel?

For me, I can’t do both well — perhaps some people can, but our visual and auditory channels can only handle so much at one time. Both channels request our attention and processing resources. I ended up getting up and shutting off the radio so that I could continue reading the blog posting. But for me, I think of it like a traffic jam. There are only so many cars that can simultaneously get through that busy highway that leads downtown.

So another application of this is that it’s helpful NOT to have a lot of auditory information going on at the same time as a lot of visual information. If you have PowerPoint slides, use graphics, photos, and/or graphs and use your audio voiceover to speak to them…but don’t list a long paragraph of text and then simply read that text and then also ask the learner to absorb other visual information at the same time. 

 

 

 

A Microlearning Framework — from jvsp.io and Pablo Navarro
This infographic is based on the experience of different clients from different industries in different training programs.

 

From DSC:
I thought this was a solid infographic and should prove to be useful for Instructional Designers, Faculty Members, and/or for Corporate Trainers as well. 

I might also consider adding a “Gotcha!” piece first — even before the welcome piece — in order to get the learner’s attention and to immediately answer the WHY question. WHY is this topic important and relevant to me? When topics are relevant to people, they care and engage a whole lot more with the content that’s about to be presented to them. Ideally, such a piece would stir some curiosity as well.

 

 

 

 

PD is getting so much better!! — from cultofpedagogy.com by Jennifer Gonzalez

Excerpts:

 

 

1. Unconferences
2. Intentional professional learning communities (PLCs)
3. Choice Boards
4. Personal Action Plans
5. Voluntary Piloting
6. Peer Observation
7. Microcredentials
8. Blended Learning
9. Lab Classrooms

 

 

 
 

From DSC:
After reviewing the article below, I wondered...if we need to interact with content to learn it…how might mixed reality allow for new ways of interacting with such content? This is especially intriguing when we interact with that content with others as well (i.e., social learning).

Perhaps Mixed Reality (MR) will bring forth a major expansion of how we look at “blended learning” and “hybrid learning.”

 


Mixed Reality Will Transform Perceptions — from forbes.com by Alexandro Pando


Excerpts (emphasis DSC):

Changing How We Perceive The World One Industry At A Time
Part of the reason mixed reality has garnered this momentum within such short span of time is that it promises to revolutionize how we perceive the world without necessarily altering our natural perspective. While VR/AR invites you into their somewhat complex worlds, mixed reality analyzes the surrounding real-world environment before projecting an enhanced and interactive overlay. It essentially “mixes” our reality with a digitally generated graphical information.

All this, however, pales in comparison to the impact of mixed reality on the storytelling process. While present technologies deliver content in a one-directional manner, from storyteller to audience, mixed reality allows for delivery of content, then interaction between content, creator and other users. This mechanism cultivates a fertile ground for increased contact between all participating entities, ergo fostering the creation of shared experiences. Mixed reality also reinvents the storytelling process. By merging the storyline with reality, viewers are presented with a wholesome experience that’s perpetually indistinguishable from real life.

 

Mixed reality is without a doubt going to play a major role in shaping our realities in the near future, not just because of its numerous use cases but also because it is the flag bearer of all virtualized technologies. It combines VR, AR and other relevant technologies to deliver a potent cocktail of digital excellence.

 


 

 

 

High-Tech, High Touch: Digital Learning Report and Workbook, 2017 Edition — from Intentional Futures, with thanks to Maria Andersen on Linkedin for her posting therein which was entitled, “Spectrums to Measure Digital Learning
Excerpt (emphasis DSC):

Our work uncovered five high-tech strategies employed by institutions that have successfully implemented digital learning at scale across a range of modalities. The strategies that underscore the high-tech, high-touch connection are customizing through technology, leveraging adaptive courseware, adopting cost-efficient resources, centralizing course development and making data-driven decisions.

Although many of the institutions we studied are employing more than one of these strategies, in this report we have grouped the institutional use cases according to the strategy that has been most critical to achieving digital learning at scale. As institutional leaders make their way through this document, they should watch for strategies that target challenges similar to those they hope to solve. Reading the corresponding case studies will unpack how institutions employed these strategies effectively.

Digital learning in higher education is becoming more ubiquitous as institutions realize its ability to support student success and empower faculty. Growing diversity in student demographics has brought related changes in student needs, prompting institutions to look to technology to better serve their students. Digital courseware gives institutions the ability to build personalized, accessible and engaging content. It enables educators to provide relevant content and interventions for individual students, improve instructional techniques based on data and distribute knowledge to a wider audience (MIT Office of Digital Learning, 2017).

PARTICIPATION IN DIGITAL LEARNING IS GROWING
Nationally, the number of students engaged in digital learning is growing rapidly. One driver of this growth is rising demand for distance learning, which often relies on digital learning environments. Distance learning programs saw enrollment increases of approximately 4% between 2015 and 2016, with nearly 30% of higher education students taking at least one digital distance learning course (Allen, 2017). Much of this growth is occurring at the undergraduate level (Allen, 2017). The number of students who take distance learning courses exclusively is growing as well. Between 2012 and 2015, both public and private nonprofit institutions saw an increase in students taking only distance courses, although private, for-profit institutions have seen a decrease (Allen, 2017).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:

Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!

© 2018 | Daniel Christian