Dr. Cathy Cavanaugh/University of Florida (education.ufl.edu/faculty/cathycavanaugh)
Among the benefits proposed for online learning with adult learners are a strengthened sense of community (Rovai and Jordan, 2004), increased instructional choices (Singh, 2003), including choices that aid in differentiation of instruction (deGula, 2004), and increases in learning and interaction (DeLacey and Leonard, 2002; Oblender, 2002).
In the most successful educational experiences, the objectives, strategies and assessments of learning are closely aligned. When planning online instruction, this guideline applies. The difference is that a wider range of choices is available for the strategies and assessments. For online learning, it is best to capitalize on activities that make optimal use of individuals learning in rich, adaptable self-paced settings.The online environment is very well-suited for:
• Practice with concepts and skills using tools that allow students to work at their own pace, including with interactive manipulatives, games and simulations;
• Reading, viewing and listening, followed by independent reflection;
• Connecting virtually for conversations and mentoring with remote students or experts, conducting web surveys, or online book groups;
• Working on multi-media projects and sharing them with a wide audience;
• Following text, audio or video instructions for well-structured tasks;
• Learning from and creating graphic organizers (Periodic Table of Visualization Methods at www.visual-literacy.org/periodic_table/periodic_table.html);
• Individualized tutoring with synchronous communication tools and cyber study groups;
• Knowledge checks using quizzes with automated feedback; and
• Peer review of student work.
References
deGuia, M. (2004). Differentiating the learning environment. In B. Hoffman (Ed), Encyclopedia of Ed Tech. coe.sdsu.edu/eet/articles/differentlearningenv/start.htm
DeLacey, B., & Leonard, A. (2002). Case study on technology and distance in education at the Harvard Business School. Ed Tech and Society, 5(2), 13-28.
Oblender, T. (2002). A hybrid course model: one solution to the high online drop-out rate. Learning and Leading with Tech, 29(6).
Rovai, A. and Jordan, H. (Aug 2004). "Blended Learning and Sense of Community: A Comparative Analysis with Traditional and Fully Online Graduate Courses." International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. www.irrodl.org/content/v5.2/rovai-jordan.html
Singh, H. (Nov-Dec, 2003). "Building effective blended learning programs." Ed Tech 43(6) 51-54. www.bookstoread.com/framework/blended-learning.pdf
------------------------------------------------
Forms of online interaction: While students gravitate to online courses for convenience and for access to educational opportunity, they may feel uncomfortably removed and isolated from their peers and instructors. The theory of transactional distance describes the feeling of distance experienced by distance learners (Moore, 1980). Low transactional distance is the desired state in a distance course and it is achieved through increased dialogue and feedback as well as through the appropriate degree of control for the learners (Saba & Shearer, 1994). During dialogue, participants are active and focused on building upon the contributions of others (Moore, 1993). Students find dialogue with their peers to be a motivational aspect of a course (Oblinger, 2005). Using the current range of technologies, dialogue can take many forms and, given the human preference for novelty, dialogue should take multiple forms in an online course.
References
Moore, M. (1980). Independent study. In R. Boyd & J. Apps (Eds), Redefining the discipline of adult education (pp. 16-31). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Moore, M. (1991). Distance ed theory. The American Journal of Distance Ed, 5(3), 1-6.
Moore, M. (1993). Theory of transactional distance. In D. Keegan (Ed.), Theoretical principles of distance ed (pp. 22-29). New York: Routledge.
Moore, M. (2007). Web 2.0: Does it really matter? The Am Journal of Distance Ed, 21(4), 177-183.
Oblinger, D. G. (2005). Is it age or IT? First steps toward understanding the Net generation. In D. Oblinger & J. Oblinger (Eds.), Educating the Net generation. Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE. Retrieved online June 20, 2007, www.educause.edu/LibraryDetailPage/666?ID=PUB7101
Saba, F., & Shearer, R. (1994). Verifying key theoretical concepts in a dynamic model of distance ed. The American Journal of Distance Ed, 8(1), 36-57.
---------------------------------------------
Guides for Online and Blended Learning
Bonk, C. J., & Graham, C. R. (2006). The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs. Pfeiffer essential resources for training and HR professionals. San Francisco: Pfeiffer.
Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2008). Blended learning in higher ed: Framework, principles, and guidelines. The Jossey-Bass higher education series. SF: Jossey-Bass.
Moore, M. G. (2007). Handbook of distance ed. Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates.
Picciano, A. G. (2007). Blended learning: Research perspectives. Needham, Mass: Sloan Consortium.