March, 2013

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education (SITE) International Conference, New Orleans, LA USA

The HyFlex Course Design: A Case Study of an Educational Technology

Course

Mariam Abdelmalak mmariam@nmsu.edu

The HyFlex Course Design: A Case Study of an Educational Technology

Course

Mariam Abdelmalak mmariam@nmsu.edu

The HyFlex Course Design:

Theoretical Framework:

• A learner-centered framework

• Flexible learning & Flexible delivery

A Learner-centered Framework:• Considering student needs, interests, and goals

(McCombs, 2000; Ongeri, 2011; Dewey, 1938).

• Students’ control over their learning (Weimer, 2002; Cleveland-Innes & Emes, 2005; Yilmaz, 2009).

• Flexible learning: Interactive learning environments to anyone, anyplace, anytime by utilizing the attributes and resources of the Internet and digital technologies (Khan, 2007; Casey & Wilson, 2005; Singh, 2003).

• Flexible delivery: Focuses on options regarding: the what, where, and when learning occurs (Yusuf, 2009; Hill, 2006).

Flexible Learning & Flexible Delivery:

The Purpose of the Study:• The purpose of this study was to answer the following

questions: 1) What does the design of an educational technology

course that follows the HyFlex design look like? 2) Why does an instructor choose to implement the HyFlex

design in his/her course?

Method:• Qualitative Case Study.• Data Gathering Methods: Observation: a graduate educational technology

course for one semester. Interview: the instructor & 6 graduate students. Analysis: coding, themes

The Design of an Educational technology Course That Followed the HyFlex Design:

Before the HyFlex Design After the HyFlex DesignFace-to-face

Meeting every week

Face-to-face + online (adobe connect room) + class recordings

Meeting twice a month

Sample Week:Face-to-face students

Online students Students who do not attend either face-to-face or online

Share verbally thought & ideas

Can use chat in adobe connect room

Face-to-face students collaborate together

Share verbally using microphone and share screen features in adobe connect roomUse chat

Online students collaborate together using adobe connect room

Listen to the class recording, and respond in the discussion area.

Discussion area

Why Choose the HyFlex Design?• Meeting students’ needs

I want to support my students in being successful in their journey whatever their journey is, and I do not want them to be discouraged and drop out, I want them to succeed. My role is to support every single student to succeed. So in order for that to happen, in order for students to succeed, you have to address their individual needs.

Why Choose the HyFlex Design?• Tailor learning experiences to students’

circumstances and schedules:I think it is important to have options regarding the delivery of the course. Face-to-face meetings should be always optional because they are dealing with peoples’ schedules and schedules are interest conflict. Interest conflict can be an issue. Sometimes students cannot attend class because of illness and some people have children, so we should have other options for these situations.

Why Choose the HyFlex Design?• Learner involvement and engagement :

It goes to learner involvement and engagement and kind of keeping them interested and invested because they made the decision. So when you make the decision for something, you are usually more invested than someone makes the decision for you.

Why Choose the HyFlex Design?• Giving students some control over their

learning :When someone gets the role of power over like a parent, a teacher and the system, it sometimes feels little overwhelming, like I have to do what other say. The fact that they have power over, or they think they have some power over their learning, by having choices, it makes their involvement and their engagement that much more. And every engagement and investment you can get from your students is one more step to help them be successful.

Why Choose the HyFlex Design?• Showing the power of technology:

I always tell my students: to be face-to-face is a priority, but if you cannot, we do have means for you to join us. The fact that we have digital technologies, we have the Internet access, it gives us far more capacity and ability to get things done effectively and efficiently. So showing that to the students in my mind is important for them in their learning process as educators and as learners.

• She is very accommodating to her students need. She recognizes that in order to meet students’ needs, accommodations need to be met in more ways than just learning accommodations. It is also a physical space, physical presence accommodation. I appreciate that very much.

• She understands life happens. It is a recognition to the fact that she is working with people who have life outside academia, people who have jobs and kids and family and what else can happen. That she recognizes we are adult that we are running things that can break our schedules and cannot make the face to face, so the recording and the online option are there in case something happens.

Students’ Comments:

Students’ Comments: • She accommodates to my needs of time by allowing

me to attend online, otherwise I will not be able to take this course.

• The instructor openness to meet students’ needs helped me to engage and participate in the class.

Conclusion:• Adult learners need flexible learning so they can balance

study, work, family and other commitments.

• The HyFlex course design acknowledges that learners have different needs and preferences concerning participation in the instructional environment and activities.

• The HyFlex course design encourages students to study when and where they are able to so.

• Educators of adult learners are actively encouraged to find effective and flexible delivery models to provide all students with more convenient access to quality learning experiences than is possible with traditional on campus offerings alone.

References:• Beatty, B. (2006, October). Designing the HyFlex world - Hybrid, flexible courses for all students. Paper presented

at the 2006 Association for Educational Communication and Technology International Conference, Dallas, TX.

• Beatty, B. (2007). Hybrid classes with flexible participation options – If you build it, how will they come? Paper presented at the 2007 Association for Educational Communications and Technology Annual Convention (October), Anaheim, CA. retrieved October 7, 2012, from http://itec.sfsu.edu/hyflex/beatty_hyflex_participation_aect_2007.pdf

• Beatty, B. (2008). Using the "HyFlex" course and design process. 2008 Sloan-C Effective Practice Award. Retrieved October 7, 2012, from http://sloanconsortium.org/effective_practices/using-quothyflexquot-course-and-design-process

• Beatty, B. (2010). Hybrid courses with flexible participation- The HyFlex design. Retrieved Sep. 24, 2012, from http://itec.sfsu.edu/hyflex/hyflex_course_design_theory_2.2.pdf

• Beatty, B. (2012). HyFlex course design: The advantages of letting students choose the blend. 9 th Annual Sloan Consortium Blended Learning Conference & Workshop. Retrieved October 7, 2012, from http://sloanconsortium.org/conference/2012/blended/hyflex-course-design-advantages-letting-students-choose-blend

• Casey, J., & Wilson, P. (2005). A practical guide to providing flexible learning in further and higher education.

Retrieved October 7, 2012, from http://www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/docs/publications/a-practical-guide-to-providing-flexible-learning-in-further-and-higher-education.pdf

• De George-Walker, L., & Keeffe, M. (2010). Self-determined blended learning: A case study of blended learning design. Higher Education Research & Development, 29(1). Retrieved October 7, 2012, from http://eprints.usq.edu.au/8603/2/De_George-Walker_Keeffe_HERD_v29n1_AV.pdf

• Dowling, C., Godfrez, J., & Gyles, N. (2003, December). Do hybrid flexible delivery teaching methods improve accounting students’ learning outcomes? Accounting Education, 12 (4), 373–391.

References:• Hill, J. (2006). Flexible learning environments: Leveraging the affordances of flexible delivery and flexible

learning. Innovative High Education, 31, 187–197. • Khan, B. (2007). Flexible learning in an open and distributed environment. In B. Khan (Ed.) Flexible learning

in an information society (pp. 1-17). USA: Information science Publishing. • King, B. (1996). Life, learning and flexible delivery. Journal of Distance Learning, 2(1), 3-13.

• MacDonald, J. (2006). Blended learning and online tutoring: A good practice guide, Aldershot, UK: Gower Publishing Co.

• Singh, H. (2003). Building Effective Blended Learning Programs. Educational Technology, 43 (6), 51-54.

• Stake, R. (1998). Case Studies. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds). Strategies of qualitative inquiry (pp. 86-109). London: Sage Publications.

• Tao, J., Fore, C., & Forbes, W. (2011). Seven best face-to-face teaching practices in a blended learning environment. Journal of Applied Learning Technology, 1(3), 20-29.

• Ugur, B., Akkoyunlu, B., & Kurbanoglu, S. (2011). Students’ opinions on blended learning and its implementation in terms of their learning styles. Education and Information Technologies, 16(1), 5-23.

• Yusuf, J. (2009). Flexible delivery issues: The case of the university of the South Pacific. Retrieved October 15, 2012, from http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Jun_09/article05.htm

Q & A

Thank You