Students’ perspectives on online and face-to-face components of a blended course design in Health and Kinesiology at a South Western Public University in the USA
Keywords:
Blended learning, Hybrid instruction, Traditional face-to-face instruction, Course design, Higher education, Black BoardAbstract
Introduction: The current higher education environment in the United States of America (USA) and worldwide is focused on providing people an opportunity to access a quality education at a competitive price and one that is flexible enough to meet the needs of a diverse student demographic. It is therefore necessary for course delivery methods to accommodate these diverse needs without sacrificing rigor necessary for accreditation due to the diverse backgrounds, occupations, and time constraints of students in today’s environment
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to establish the students’ perception of the online and face-to-face components of a blended course design at a South Western Public University in the USA.
Methods and material: The sample of this study consisted of 200 students drawn from four different blended courses in the Department of health and Kinesiology at a medium sized public university in South West of USA. A modified questionnaire from Sitter et al., (2009) with 19 questions was used to collect responses from students. The survey instrument employed a 5-point Likert scale ranging from strongly agree (5), to strongly disagree (1).
Results: Majority of the students have a positive view of the blended learning including the online and face-to-face components. A consistent minority of the students expressed disagreement especially pertaining to technology-based communication, preferred mode of delivery, online discussion participation and grade scores.
Discussion: Although the majority of students perceived blended learning and its components positively, there is need for instructors to address the communication, technology, and online learning facilitation challenges if all learners are to learn effectively.
Conclusions and recommendations: It is clear that the majority of students are ready and have accepted blended learning course designs at this medium sized public university in south west of the United States of America and therefore there is room for expansion of the initiative to benefit more students.
Downloads
Metrics
References
Allen, I. E., Seaman, J. and Garrett, J. (2007) Blending In: The Extent and Promise of Blended Education in the United States. Needham, MA: The Sloan Consortium, March 2007. Retrieved November 24, 2015 from http://www.sloan-c.org/publications/survey/pdf/Blending_In.pdf.
Bandura, A. (1975). Social learning & personality development, Holt, Rinehart & Winston, INC: NJ.
Bonk, C., Kim, K. J., & Zeng, T. (2006). Future directions of blended learning in higher education and workplace learning settings. In C. Bonk & C. Graham (Eds.). The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives local designs (pp. 550-567).
Britt, M. (2015). How to better engage online students with online strategies. College Student Journal, 49 (3), 399-404.
Bryan, C. (2014). Approaches to Delivering Online Programs in Kinesiology. Kinesiology Review, 3, 200-208.
Colis, B., & Moonen, J. (2001). Flexible learning in a digital world: Experiences and expectations. London: Kogan-Page.
Delialioglu, O. and Yildirim, Z. (2007). Students’ Perceptions on Effective Dimensions of Interactive Learning in a Blended Learning Environment. Educational Technology & Society, 10 (2). 133-146.
Dixson, M. D. (2010, June). Creating effective student engagement in online courses: What do students find engaging? Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 10(2), 1-13.
Dziuban, C., Moskal, P., and Hartman, J. (2005). Higher education, blended learning and the generations: Knowledge is power-no more. In J. Bourne and J.C. Moore (Eds.), Elements of Quality Online Education: Engaging Communities. Needham, MA: Sloan Center for Online Education, 2005.
El Mansour, B. and Mupinga, D. M. (2007). Students’ positive and negative experiences in Hybrid and Online classes. College Student Journal, 41 (1), 242-249.
Garnham, C. and Kaleta, R. (2002). Introduction to Hybrid Courses. Teaching with Technology Today, (8) 6. University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. Retrieved November 22, 2015 from http://www.uwsa.edu/ttt/articles/garnham.htm.
Gould, T. (2003). Hybrid classes: Maximizing institutional resources and student learning. Proceedings of the 2003 ASCUE Conference, Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. Retrieved November 8, 2015 from http://www.ascue.org/files/proceedings/2003/p54.pdf.
Hartman, J., Moskal, P. and Dziuban, C. (2005) Preparing the academy of today for the learner of tomorrow. In Oblinger, D. and Oblinger, J. (Eds.), Educating the Net Generation: An Educause e-Book.
Hensley, G. (2005). Creating a hybrid college course: Instructional design notes and recommendations for beginners. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 1 (2), 1-5.
Hijazi, S., Crowley, M., Smith, M.L., and Schaffer, C. (2006) Maximizing learning by teaching blended courses. Proceedings of the 2006 ASCUE Conference, Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. Retrieved November 21, 2015 from http://fits.depauw.edu/ascue/Proceedings/2006/Papers/p67.pdf.
Jaschik, S. (2009). The evidence on online education. Retrieved November 24, 2015 from http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/06/29/online.
Lloyd-Smith, L. (2010). Exploring the Advantages of Blended Instruction at Community Colleges and technical Schools. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6 (2), Retrieved November 24, 2015 from http://jolt.merlot.org/vol6no2/lloyd-smith_0610.pdf
Lynch, R., & Dembo, M. (2004). The relationship between self-regulation and online learning in a blended learning context. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 5 (2).
Maki, R. H., & Maki, W. S. (2007). Online courses. In F. T. Durso (Ed.) Handbook of applied cognition (2nd cd., pp. 527-552). New York: Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Rovai, A. (2002). Bulding sense of community at a distance. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 3 (1).
Rovai, A. P., and Hope, M. J. (2004). Blended Learning and Sense of Community: A comparative analysis with traditional and fully online graduate courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 5(2), 1-8.
Saade, R.G. and Kira, D. (2009). Computer anxiety in e-learning: The effect of computer self-efficacy. Journal of Information Technology Education, (8), 177-190.
Shachar, M. (2008). Meta-Analysis: The preferred method of choice for the assessment of Distance learning quality factors. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 9 (3).
Shachar, M., & Neumann, Y. (2003). Differences between traditional and distance education academic performances: A meta-analytic approach. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 4 (2), 1-20.
Sheehy, K. (2013, January 16). Online course enrollment climbs for 10th straight year. U.S. News and World Report. Retrieved from http://www.usnes.com/education/online-education/articles/2013/01/08/online-course-enrollment-climbs Shephard, K. (2008). Higher education for sustainability: seeking affective learning outcomes International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 9(1), 87-98.
Sitter, V., Carter, C., Mahan, R., Massello, C. and Carter, T. (2009). Hybrid course design: Faculty and student perceptions. Proceedings of the ASCUE 2009, Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. Retrieved November 21st 2015 from http://www.ascue.org/files/proceedings/2009/p40.pdf.
Stewart, D. (2008). Classroom management in the online environment. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, (4)3, p. 371-374.
Tallent-Runnels, M. K., Thomas, J. A., Lan, W. Y., Cooper, S., Ahern, T. C., Shaw, S. M., & Liu, X. (2006). Teaching courses online: A Review of the research`. Review of Educational Research, 76 (1), 93-135.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Young, J. (March 22, 2002). Hybrid teaching seeks to end divide between traditional and online instruction. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 48 (28), A33-34.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors can retain copyright, while granting the journal right of first publication. Alternatively, authors can transfer copyright to the journal, which then permits authors non-commercial use of the work, including the right to place it in an open access archive. In addition, Creative Commons can be consulted for flexible copyright licenses.
©1999 Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
