(almost) almost final research paper

 A note to my peer review buddies–the format is a problem–I could not get it to download so I had to cut and paste,  Please be honest and let me know what else I need to do to make this ok….you are all doing something so different.  I hope this doesn’t bore you!

Also, I am having a hard time with the flow, although I think David helped a lot with that.  If you can think of a different word or so, let me know anywhere. I am going to spend all day Thursday, I think, on this. Tonight is our superintendent’s dinner and our top 25 grads get to invite a teacher that helped them, and I am going an so honored to be doing so!

Thanks again for all your help.

Evolution …not Revolution

Education, according to the characterizations of many in the field, is currently faced with two options, evolution or revolution.  Some pundits suggest  that these options are mutually exclusive, however an ‘all or nothing’ approach no longer seems feasible. There is a third choice, called blended learning or hybrid learning, which combines the attributes of a face to face class with some of the most relevant attributes of an online class, thus offering to both teacher and student the best of each.  Although there are many teachers in the profession that resist evolution, adopting online technology for use in a traditional educational setting is key to remaining relevant.  In this paper, I will discuss the need for blended or hybrid classes for, at least, the upper grades in public high schools, which combine the attributes of a face-to-face class with some of the best attributes of an online class to create the best pedagogical modality for students. 

            In his abstract on “Academic Library Data from the United States,” John Budd notes that some people see a revolution in academic libraries, while others see the changes as more evolutionary.  I would argue that the same sort of situation appears in regard to using technology in the classroom.  Some educators are decrying the growth of online classes causing them to fear the end of education as we now know it.  They fear that students will eventually be teaching themselves, and that teaching will become an extinct occupation, because they fear the demise of face-to-face classes.   Others see the move simply as evolutionary, that change happens and teachers need to evolve too.  I would argue that teachers must adapt, that teachers in face to face classes need to adopt the blended learning model, and that the result will be students who become more invested in their own learning and will be better prepared for college. 

First: a definition of hybrid learning or blended learning. 

            One of the biggest difficulties with understanding hybrid or blended learning, and teaching, is that there are so many terms for it: it is variously called hybrid, blended, e-learning, synchronous, learning system, instructor-led training, and many other names.  For the purposes of this paper I choose to use the term “blended learning” which was adopted by the British Educational Communications and Technology Agency (BECTa), which described it as “a combination of face-to-face and on-line delivery.” (Gulc)   Just as one could find the same topic, and virtually the same lesson plan, taught in as many different ways as there are teachers; there are many different styles of the “on-line” delivery portion of this definition.

What basic technologies which are used in online classes could be adapted for use in a face to face classroom?

 

There has rarely been a time when education has faced as many challenges and changes as those facing the public high school teachers today.   Once upon a time, learning to use technology in the classroom involved a slide projector or a reel to reel tape player.  Now, technology in the classroom can be as up-to-date as smart boards, blogs, wikis, movie-maker, and a myriad of other applications.  Teachers must know and be able to use, at least, overhead projectors, computer grading programs, Blackboard or similar applications, and be able to use, regularly, email and other forums with which to communicate with students and parents.  However, these are not enough skills to help our high school students become accustomed to the twenty-first century literacies that will be expected of them when they begin college and move into adulthood.  The more technology teachers can infuse into their classrooms, the more likely they will be able to move with that student forward into the next generation of technology. 

One of the major issues is therefore which technologies are most appropriate for high school classrooms where the teacher wants to add some elements of blended learning to a normal face to face classroom?  There seems to be no research at all on this, so it became necessary to examine the generally accepted technologies which are most frequently used by college instructors and professors, and about which there is minimal research, and then to apply that information to high school teaching–based on some common knowledge about modern high schools in the Downriver Michigan area. 

In their article “Achieving teaching and learning excellence with technology,” Elizabeth Marcoux and David Loertscher suggest teachers should “begin with best practices you want to achieve and then fit the tool to that challenge.” (150)  Their comprehensive article groups the characteristics of various technologies into six major categories which are determined by the way they work for the teacher and the students.  This seems to be a fundamentally common sense approach.  If each classroom teacher could determine what one or two areas[jjw1]  they want to work on and then find the best tool for that purpose, it would be easier for the classroom teacher to begin to implement, it would make more sense to him or her, and it would serve a specific purpose.  As Marcoux and Loetscher mention, too many teachers are taught to use a specific technology at an inservice, and while it seems very useful and may be fun, individual teachers often do not have time to fit their curriculum to it.  If, however, teachers determine their need and then find the appropriate technology, it is a winning situation for all.

Therefore, four basic premises support this argument:

1.  Change will happen. If we do not evolve with our students and update the manner in which we teach them, there indeed might be a revolution of sorts. Some teachers and school administrators already fear that some students will decide that the normal box school is no longer for them, and with the myriad of options, they and their parents will begin looking elsewhere for their education.

2.  It is not only possible to use some of the concepts and constructs of online classes in the face-to-face classroom, but rather it is beneficial.  Although there is                                                                                                 

undoubtedly a learning curve that the average classroom teacher will have to deal with, he or she should take the initiative to learn to use some of the most common online technology to enhance the learning experience of students in the brick and mortar classroom.

3.  Since students frequently show satisfaction with their online classes, some of these technologies which seem to work so well in online classes should be able to enhance face to face classes in much the same way and increase the students’ satisfaction with their classes. 

4.  The tools which online teachers use to communicate with their students can be added to face to face classrooms in order to increase the success of students in the programs, to increase communication with parents, and to help create learning communities which include the teacher, the student and the student’s families—thereby increasing any individual student’s chance for success.

1.  Change will happen …and teachers need to evolve too

Skimming through journals on technology, or on technology in education, there are certain terms that seem to be omnipresent.  Much of the literature about technology and modern classroom teaching uses such words as ‘transformation” and “revolution” in discussions of the most recent technology in the classroom or in online programs.  Glasgow University and Michigan State University have partnered to create the ‘spoken word team,’ and they state in their introductory power point online ‘multimedia and revolution in scholarly communication [occur] in a world of constant change.” 

These are terms that indicate radical changes, changes that are occurring right now whether we participate in them or not. Public education is in flux, with some districts firing all their teachers because the district fails to meet Adequate Yearly Progress, with some districts trying to school students online, and other district administrators wringing their hands and worrying about the future of their particular school or school system.  One thing seems for sure and that is if teachers and educators in general don’t learn to adapt, we will be like the proverbial dinosaur—extinct, because there are programs and for-profit entities waiting in the wings to take over the dwindling jobs that teachers are now performing.

The Online Computer Library Center task force determined that as early as 2003, there were more institutions which offered hybrid learning courses than those which offer online or distance learning. As of 2003, 70% of U.S. institutions offered distance learning and 80% offered hybrid courses. According to their report, since their definition of hybrid learning was fairly narrow, if a more generous definition were used, the total would be higher.  Since current high schools are, at least in Michigan, preparing ALL students for college or trade school beyond high school, it is imperative that the public school classroom prepare those students for the future.  They must be schooled in and practice with those technologies in order to successful later on.

2. It is beneficial to both students and teachers to include some elements of online education into the face to face classroom, therefore creating a hybrid teaching environment.

 

            According to the OCLC task force, at a very minimum, some of the technologies should enable faculty to “distribute information to students and engage with students individually and collectively.” But Harvey Singh goes further, indicating that “increasing numbers of learning designers are experimenting with blended learning models that combine various delivery modes. Anecdotal evidence indicates that blended learning not only offers more choices but also is more effective.” (51)  He goes on to suggest that blended learning “mixes various event-based activities, including face-to-face classrooms, live e-learning, and self-paced learning.”  Singh is speaking specifically of college or university programs here and it is important to keep in mind that, unlike college students, high school students might not be as self-motivated or as able to self-schedule as college students are, so they will need some further training in developing the skills to handle these technologies. In one of the few articles about high school e-learning, “Managing e-Learning: What are the Implications for Schools?” Helen Boulton, argues that younger students of full-time compulsory school age [in the U.K.], do need training in using e-learning materials and developing independent learning skills.  She proposes that preparation needs to be carried out at an earlier level before introducing students to e-learning.

            Many public high schools in America today are suffering cut-backs in their teaching staff due to monetary concerns, and that often results in larger class sizes.  How might a teacher regularly facilitate interaction with all these students in a face to face class? Most teachers would find it difficult, if not impossible.  The most common situation in a large class is that the very brightest or most verbal will speak out the most—thereby gaining the most attention from the teacher.  Those who are unsure of themselves often will not speak out at all, or may constantly crave attention by other behaviors which distract from the lesson.  However, if there is technology available, the teacher might want to devise a lesson whereby students will have to respond to her in a blog or with a class management courseware such as Blackboard.  This affords the opportunity to every student to ‘speak’ and requires them to do so.  The teacher may not be able to ‘hear’ the student’s voice, but she will hear from the student.  This gives every student an equal chance to be heard, encouraged, and to relate to the teacher.  Even better would be if every student responded to the teacher’s question and then was offered an opportunity to respond to each other.  Suddenly, instead of the noisy two or three students who covet the attention in class, the attention is more widespread. 

            How else might a teacher incorporate a blended learning environment into a face to face high school classroom? Again, one of the major factors depends on what technology, including hardware, is available to the student and the instructor.  But an excellent example was produced by Allen, et.al, at the 23^rd annual ascilite conference, titled “Who’s learning? Whose technology?”  In it the authors show how they developed a ‘student-centred’ approach to a large, 300 person, lecture class.  The students were set up for a collaborative learning experience to improve student engagement, and to include problem-solving and team-work into their learning.  The result was mixed, however the students agreed that they developed real-life skills, became more self-directed, and developed generic skills.  The instructors had grouped the students and the consensus was that the students needed to be more prepared by the instructors in the future, but that the project was quite successful and after a bit of tweaking, would be administered in the future. After two years and much tweaking, the outcome was considerably improved with the majority of students agreeing that the assignment made them more involved (Allen 39).  Although this specific trial was for a college class, one might presume that, if a high school teacher took the time to help her students to develop the necessary skills, and facilitate a project, it, too, might be very successful in engaging all students and give those quiet students a ‘voice.’ 

 

3.  Teachers in face to face classrooms should be able to increase student satisfaction by incorporating some online teaching tools

 

As stated by Collins and Halverson in “The Second Revolution: Rethinking Education in the Age of Technology,” …” information technologies have pushed us to a radical, learner-oriented understanding of knowledge acquisition. Information technologies foster a more hands-on, activity-based education.”  If this is, indeed, true, then teachers in face to face classrooms need to be able to harness this technology for use in their classrooms in order to empower their students.

Students are finding more and more satisfaction with online classes, [jjw2] according to a 2005 and 2006 UK Government National Student Satisfaction Survey, students enjoy having some control over their own learning.  The Open College of Great Britain with 280,000 students was rated twice the top college for satisfaction in Great Britain.   ————   In addition, many colleges in the US are offering online programs successfully.  Between them, Utah and Florida have approximately 56000 online students, and are enjoying similar success. _________

Face to face classroom teachers can enhance their teaching, their

connections and communication with students and parents, and their students’ interest by using some of the technology tools that are commonly used in the online classroom.  They might explore the use of websites, blogs, or other calendar, or assignment functions.  They might encourage email for the parents and a synchronous discussion format such as IM for their students to use in group discussions.  As students are able to access their grades, their assignments, and sometimes their teachers, online, they become more self-directed and self-sufficient learners.  Further, since most college students will be taking an online class at some point in their careers, the use of these tools in high school will further prepare these students for college.

4.  Online teaching technology, if added to the face to face classroom, can enhance communication between teacher and student, between teacher and parent, and potentially even between student and student

 

Harris and Goodall discovered that after reviewing several studies, “the empirical evidence shows that parental engagement is one of the key factors in securing higher student achievement and school improvement (based on studies by Desforges and Abouchaar 2003, and Harris and Chrispeels 2006).  They state  that one of the major reasons parents are not involved in schools is due to their work commitments. (Harris 280) The authors indicate that parents will become involved if they feel they have the capacity to contribute.  They also say “we need to know more about the ways in which parental engagement can be enhanced and facilitated across different sectors of society.” (Harris 281)  This would suggest that if teachers had a regular way to communicate with parents (by way of Blackboard, Zangle, class blogs, etc), and if the parents had a way of communicating back to the teachers (even if after-hours or in the middle of the night), this new line of communication would help everyone stay connected, and help parents, even those whose work prohibits telephone calls or visits during the school day, to connect.. 

            Bess Keller quotes a high school teacher from California. “He has cut the number of phone calls he receives by putting information such as course calendars on his school web page, which is also packed with messages about assignments, due dates, etc.”

Where do we go from here? How do we start? What to consider first?

            There are potentially hundreds of theories or plans to incorporate technologies into the 21^st Century public high school classroom. The biggest problem is that there does not seem to be substantial research on what works best.  And, potentially, as with all lessons, what works best for one teacher might not necessarily be a good fit for another.  So, how does a concerned teacher with little experience in on-line technologies go about deciding on where to begin for her own particular classroom and her own lesson plans?  Part of the answer must include what technologies are readily available to her and to her students.  But, Derek Mueller, in his “Digital Underlife in the Networked Writing Classroom” echoes one of the most common theories.  “Curriculum designers [or teachers who are designing their own curriculum] may need to stop using the face-to-face interface as the standard for what education should be.  Instead, studying how online teaching practices can be adopted in the face-to-face classroom may create a whole new resource for discovering sound pedagogical practices, especially for writing classes.”

In conclusion

            There is definitely a need for research into what works for high school classrooms and what is most effective. However, lacking research in high schools, one must look to the nearest available resource:  empirical information from college studies. Most of the information concludes that if students are taught in a face to face classroom with some of the added elements of on-line classes, students become more self-directed learners; they become more satisfied and engaged learners, and most importantly, they are learning the skills they will need for their future scholastic careers and for life.

            As Kylene Beers stated at her 2009 NCTE convention address, “We say to each other, perhaps loudly and adamantly, that times they sure are a’changin’, but I’m not sure we stop and ask ourselves ‘what do those changes compel me to do?’”  She goes on to answer her own question, “the best teachers teach from a cornucopia of pedagogy, choosing the right instructional strategy for each student …The best teachers, like good leaders, have the courage to overcome obstacles, the courage to sail into the unknown, even though, here, there be dragons.” And the best teachers must use technology wisely to teach her students skills they will need for the twenty-first century.

Works Cited

Allen, B., Crosky, A., McAlpine,I., Hoffman, M. & Munroe, P., (2006). A blended approach to collaborative  learning:        Can it make large group teaching more student-centred?  Proceedings of the 23^rd annual ascilite conference:      Who’s learning? Whose technology? (pp 33-42) Sydney: The University of Sydney. (web). 

Beers,  Kylene. Sailing over the Edge: Navigating the Uncharted Waters of a World Gone Flat. The NCTE 2009 Presidential Address. Pub. Dec 2009, NCTE Magazine (pp 1-8). Also available online http://tinyurl.com/yg6pn6t.

Boulton, Helen. Managing e-Learning: What are the Real Implications for Schools? Electronic Journal of e-Learning. (6-1) March 2008.

Budd, John. LIBRES Library and Information Science Research Electronic Journal Volume 19, Issue 2, September 2009 Pg 1 LIBRES ISSN 1058-6768 Volume 19, Issue 2, September 2009 , <http://libres curtin.edu.au/>. Academic Library Data from the United States: An Examination of Trends. (web).

Collins, Allan & Halverson, Richard. Rethinking Education in the Age of Technology: The Digital Revolution and Schooling in America. 2009. Teachers College Press. New York, NY. (print)

Gulc, Eddie. Using Blended Learning to Accommodate Different Learning Styles. British Educational Communications and Technology Agency.  September 2006. 30 March 2010. <http://www.hlst.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/ publications.html>. (web).

Harris, Alma and Goodall, Janet.  “Do parents know they matter? Engaging all parents in learning.   Educational Research (50-3). September 2008. (pp 277-289) ) ISSN 0013-1881.  print ISSN 1469-5847 online 2008 NFER.            (print).

Keller, Bess.  Schools Seek to Channel Parent Involvement.  Education Digest September 2008 (74-1), 1 April 2008.  Education Week. (pp 11-15).  http://www.edweek.org/login.html?/ (web). 

Marcoux, Elizabeth & Loertscher, David. Achieving Teaching and Learning Excellence with Technology.  Teacher Librarian, v37 n2 p14-22. Dec 2009. (print).

| |

Mueller, Derek, Digital Underlife in the Networked Writing Classroom, Computers and Composition, (26-4) 2009 (pp 240-250). http://www.sciencedirect. com/ science?_ob/

McLean, Neil & Sander, Heidi, Eds.. OCLC E-Learning Task Force, Libraries and the Enhancement of E-Learning. October 2003. White Paper prepared by the Task Force http://www5.oclc.org/downlowds/community /elearning.pdf.

Singh, Harvey. Building Effective Blended Learning Programs. November-            December 2003.  Educational Technology, 43-6.  (pp 51-54). (print).

 

---

 [jjw1]I don’t like this word—need a better one

 [jjw2]Cannot find the source for this info—may need to remove

I CAN”T BELIEVE I DID THAT?