XplanaZine

Developing a hybrid course involves more than simply uploading online articles into Blackboard or WebCT and slapping together a discussion board. To be effective, hybrid models must be carefully planned and structured. Here’s what instructors must keep in mind, and how they can either have a tremendously successful learning event or end up with disgruntled, confused students.

Integrating Modes of Delivery

One of the big challenges in a blended course is the effective integration of the two modes of delivery.

Face-to-Face <==> online: This involves extending the discussions that one has in a face-to-face environment to online.

1. Ask students to discuss in class an article or information you have posted online.

2. Ask students to do a web search on a topic, and come to class prepared to share their findings in a group and then prepare a list / discussion to present to the class.

Online <==> Face-to-Face: This involves the transporting of information from the online delivery format back to the face-to-face environment. Online in this case does not need to mean computer-based. It can involve anything that is interactive, including PDAs.

1. Require the students to post a comment that arises from an in-class activity, along with a link to a website that supports / illustrates their comment.

2. Ask students to send each other files or links to websites, then write a synopsis of each. Post these in a discussion area.

These aren’t the most complex of activities, but at least they start to actively bridge “delivery gaps.”

Discussion Board Question Formulation: Provocative, Followed by Reflective

1—The instructor must develop questions the require reflective thought, in both the face-to-face environment, and at a distance;

2—The instructor must effectively guide the students so that they make connections and start constructing the “meta-cognitive” processes that allow them to develop general principles that can be applied across the curriculum.

The development of meta-cognitive skills — can be difficult because some students will not be ready to make general principles, and will wish to debate / discuss specific points, and perhaps relate to their own experiences or to current events.

How do we measure outcomes in the hybrid tasks?

1. Since you’re having the students do concrete tasks, the first outcome would be a participation grade.

2. If there are qualitative standards attached, then one can start to develop rubrics — (number of words, quality of the links that are shared, quality of the discussion).

3. If research skills are being developed, I’d recommend having students develop and share annotated bibliographies. Be sure to assign separate topics so that students aren’t just running over the same ground, but are developing useful information that can be used in future tasks.

Four Items that Can be Moved Online in a Hybrid Course

1. Handouts — This is probably the easiest way to utilize online resources and to create an online component. One can make the readings available through the learning management system that is being utilized.

To make things most effective, it is important to incorporate an online interactive component (e-mailing the instructor, posting comments), and to make connections back to one’s experience. Thus, the activity is “pinging” the learner’s long-term memory with new short-term packets of information.

2. Lecture Notes and PowerPoint presentations — These can be worse than useless unless the students perceive that there is some sort of value in downloading and reviewing. Perhaps the easiest approach is to make them contain valuable information which will be covered in a test. Perhaps this seems a bit Machiavellian or heavy-handed, but it works. If you want students to remember it 3 minutes after the test, try making the lecture notes and PowerPoints contain images and information that touch the individual’s lived experiences. Graphics are particularly effective. If students are asked to “make meaning” out of the graphics (hunt for semiotic triggers that create meaning), this can be a great starting point for cognitive maps, often referred to as “mind mapping” in First-Year Comp courses, as an invention strategy.

3. Outcome-Based Group Discussion Items: Think of the group work that is done in the typical First-Year Comp class. Groups often do peer-reviews of individual papers to scan for grammar and syntax issues, as well as gaps in the structure of the argument. The focal point is the application of process (which incorporates conceptual underpinning) in order to achieve an outcome. The key to success in the online version is to have individuals from the group collaborate — via a wiki, a discussion board, or a blog.

4. Instructor-Guided Discussions: Instructor guided discussions require a delicate balancing act between giving students freedom, and yet asking them to look back and reflect on what has been said, and to make connections to the “bigger picture” — the conceptual items that are usually spelled out in the learning goals. This can be a rigid process, and it is important not to be too tied to the original structure of the course, but to allow oneself to make connections to outslide readings, and illuminating thoughts, texts, and ideas, particularly if they are recent or if they touch most of the students’ lives.

Advantages

Perhaps the most clear-cut advantages involve the following (for a first-year composition class):

• More time to reflect on the reading;
• Discussions that allow multimedia presentations to be accessed on-demand
• The content can be accessed within an appropriate context – this is especially true with PDAs – for example, if you’re investigating a sculpture (say, “Christo’s Gate” in NYC) and you can bring your Blackberry with you and enter in your thoughts, or take photos w/your cell phone.

Pitfalls

The biggest pitfalls are:

1. No clear connection between the online content & the face-to-face environment. The dreaded questions, “Why are we doing this?” or “What good is this?” could then arise and start undermining the focus.

2. Discussion goes into orbit. Students begin to discuss the particular details of readings or current events and when they are asked to focus back on the big picture, they become confused or angry.

3. Activities do not correspond to and provide scaffolding for assessment tasks. If the tasks seem unrelated, students will become angry.