skip to content

May 2013 - Dr. Keith Restine, Associate Director of TLT

Research on Hybrid

Theoretical Frameworks

  • How People Learn (HPL) - Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 1999
  • Engaged Collaborative Discourse - Bunderson (2003)
  • Community of Inquiry (CoI) - Garrison and Vaughn
  • Transactional Distance - Wheeler (2007)

Learning Effectiveness (meta-analyses)

  • Paul (2001) - Minimal difference in favor of blended over online
  • Zhao et al. (2005) - Instructor involvement had most significant impact
  • Sitzmann et al. (2006) - CBL was determined to be more effective than CI
  • Bernard et al. (2009) - No significant difference across DE, Asynchronous DE, and Mixed DE
  • Means et al. (2009) - Online produced stronger student learning than F2F

Learner Satisfaction

  • Dziuban, Moskal, & Hartman (2005) - Factor analysis - Two dimensions of satisfaction (learning engagement and interaction value) - Identified 8 elements contributing to
    learner satisfaction
  • Rothmund (2009) - Correlation - Learner interaction and satisfaction

Faculty Satisfaction

  • Dziuban et al. (2004) - 88% were satisfied with teaching blended courses
  • Aycock, Garnham, & Kaleta (2002) - All faculty happy with first blended teaching experience
  • Vignare & Starenko (2005) - 41% will teach blended again

Planning for Hybrid

Castle Top Diagram

Planning for Hybrid Castle Top Diagram

Examples: Face-to-Face vs. Online

Diagram showing difference between face-to-face vs online instruction

Course Structure for a Hypothetical Course

Diagram for a Hypothetical Course Structure

Alignment Blueprint

Diagram of Course Alignment Blueprint

page last updated 4/15/2014 8:32 PM