1. MuLLLti
Blended Learning for Lifelong Learners in a
Multicampus Context.
DIVERSE 2012 – “Enrich the learning experience”
04 07 2012
Y. Blieck, K. Goeman, L. Vandeput, S. Van Laer
(KHLeuven) (HUBrussel) (KHLeuven) (KU Leuven)
2. LLL1
• Age: 25
• Bachelor marketing
• Workweek 60-70h
• Interested in master
Psychology out of interest and
for professional purposes.
Would like to graduate at 30
Photo: http://www.cepolina.com/fr/sourire_les_gens_fille_lunettes.htm
9. Lifelong learners who are they?
• Age
• Motivation and interest?
• Origin of motivation…
• Workload
• Family
• Prior education
10. MuLLLti – lifelong learners
• students in
formal Higher
Educational
Institutions
(HEI’s)
• who often
combine work
and study
11. Challenges for LLL in higher
education
• Educational
• Social
• Economical
http://www.flickr.com/photos/robinvanmourik/488068701/ http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/deed.en
13. LLL and higher educational
institutes (HEI)?
- INCREASING DEMAND
- CHALLENGES FOR HEI
14. Increasing demand
• Knowledge society
• Initial diploma quickly loses value
• Diploma no lifelong guarantee for proper professional
functioning
• Shortage of human capital
=> Lifelong learning high on the agenda in various organisations :
15. Challenges for HEI
• Face mismatch skills levels and jobs requirements
• Open flexible learning pathways
• A lifelong approach to learning
• Reform themselves in order to adapt
• Be open for cooperation on all levels
16. MuLLLti – some observations so
far...
• LLL is a concern for our institutions
• But:
• Effective participation of adults is low
• Nog aanvullen
18. Can Blended Learning help?
- WHAT IS BLENDED LEARNING?
- WHY IS IT CONSIDERED?
- TYPES OF BLENDS?
- HURDLES TO TAKE
19. What is Blended Learning?
• Variety of definitions
• “a combination of face-to-face learning experiences
and on-line learning experiences”
• Describes an instructional rather than learning
approach
• Risk to define Blended Learning in this narrow way
20. MuLLLti – Blended learning
“A good blend is a mix:
- of study materials,
- of didactical activities of the instructor/designers and
- technology based or enhanced learning activities
that contributes to the realization of the objectives,
which motivate and challenge the students to show the best of
themselves.”
(Vandeput, 2011: p.1.11).
21. Why consider Blended Learning?
1. To increase accessibility to education
2. Can act as catalyst to transform traditional approaches of
instruction and teaching
3. Enhance cost and resource effectiveness
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wakingtiger/3157621376/sizes/m/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/xandercage/4642632285/sizes/m/in/photostream/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/drb62/2474763910/sizes/m/in/photostream/
22. Why consider Blended Learning?
1.
Improved learning outcomes should
remain the reason to consider BL
(Mitchell and Honore, 2007; Trasler, 2002 in Poon et al.
(2010)).
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wakingtiger/3157621376/sizes/m/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/xandercage/4642632285/sizes/m/in/photostream/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/drb62/2474763910/sizes/m/in/photostream/
23. Blended Courses can offer
solutions
• Increased access
• Increased flexibility
• Suited to educational needs
• Suited to social needs
• Active engagement
• Connection to real life contexts
24. Types of Blends…
What learner activity does the technology allow?
Graham & Robison (2007)
In Picciano, A. and Dziuban, C. (EDs.) (2007). Blended Learning: Research Perspectives. United States of America: the Sloan
Consortium.
25. Transforming Blends?
• Four fundamental characteristics of effective
learning environments (Roschelle et al., 2000):
– Active engagement
– Participation in groups
– Frequent interaction and feedback
– Connections to real world contexts
26. Hurdles to take…
• ‘The proliferation of superficial Blends’
• ‘A focus on the scope of a Blend’
• ‘Too much consideration to efficiency and
productivity at the expense of the goal of
effective pedagogy
27. MuLLLti – some observations so
far…
• Course re-design seems difficult for lecturers
Instructional design and pedagogy
• Their technological competencies vary
• Copyright can be an issue but Creative Commons and
Open Educational Resources are not considered at this
point
• LLL / BL seems not a concern to all lecturers
28. Possible within one institution?
• Sufficient Blended courses have to be offered
• Course design involves a lot of effort (know-how as well as
time and costs) for the HEI
• Participation rate of LLL in HEI?
• Unlikely that HEI’s will be able to redesign any, if enough,
courses to increase accessibility for lifelong learners
31. MuLLLti – Multicampus Education
‘Education that is designed, developed implemented, supported
and/or assessed between two or more geographical sites’.
(Multicampus education within KU Leuven Association).
32. Multicampus Education (MCE)
• Spearhead of KU Leuven Association
• Institutions can choose to combine resources (staff and
infrastructure)
• Several institutions could provide entire curricula (for lifelong
learners)
• Cooperation can be regional, national and international
33. MuLLLti – 3 MCE groups
1. Social Work
2. Teacher
Education
3. Business
Administration
34. Some implications of BL in MCE
• New teaching roles for lecturers
• Copyright, Creative Commons and Open
Educational Resources
• Quality Control
35. MuLLLti – some observations so
far?
• Co-operation between lecturers / institutions is challenging e.g.
- Level (professional bachelor vs. academic bachelor)
- Experience with LLL
- Experience(s) with BL
• aanvullen
Large variation in age (basically from 18y to 65y) Often very motivated and strongly interested (but origin of their motivation varies) Obtain a diploma / refresh knowledge / out of interest Big difference in workload (certain students with a job have full-time jobs while others take a career break) Some have children, others don't Some have no diploma of secondary education while others already have a master's degree.
Economic Level: responsible for direct costs (e.g. tuition fees and study material) and indirect costs (e.g. childcare and reduction of working hours). Educational Level: sometimes confronted with courses that seem irrelevant or contradict their own professional experiences. Courses can also be very theoretical with little practical examples from the working atmosphere. Furthermore, inconveniences can occur due to the limited opening hours of administrative services and libraries. Especially older students can be faced with a lack of ICT knowledge. Students with a job often have little time for tasks and group assignments. Pride may sometimes prevent students from searching for help e.g. in connection with study choice, learning skills. Social Level: Thirdly, the combination of work, studying and family and social life can be very challenging. Lack of time can lead to drop out, social isolation or relation and health problems (Bowl, 2003 in Couttenier, 2007). Students with a job are forced to cope with new and changing roles which is a stress factor (Goodman et al., 2006 in Couttenier, 2007) Also relationships with friends and family change due to studying. Shown support by friends and family might be less than expected or entirely missing.
Ministry of Education in Flanders (Belgium), UNESCO, Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development ( OECD), Vlaamse onderwijsraad (VLOR), European Union (EU), World Bank and the International Labour Organization (ILO)
Flllex consortium, 2012: 2012 Annual Growth Survey: education and training systems have to be modernized to reinforce their efficiency and quality and to equip people with the skills and competences they need to succeed on the labour market (national government, other HEI ’ s, other educational levels (VET) and with social partners )
Enabling : to increase access and convenience for students Enhancing : increase instructor or student productivity Transforming : moving from an information transmission model towards a more active learning pedagogy Graham & Robison (2007)
the proliferation of superficial Blends ’ those Blends are not adding anything significant to the instruction. The risk lies in the fact that not enough time and costs are deployed. ‘ a focus on the scope of a Blend ’ . Sometimes, when designing a Blended Learning environment, the focus lies on the scope of the Blend (e.g. 25% online and 75 face-to-face; or a reduction of x% of class time). ‘ Too much consideration to efficiency and productivity at the expense of the goal of effective pedagogy. Technology should be used exclusively to increase productivity if this in turn frees up time and energy for the faculty or students to dedicate to more active and innovative face-to-face experiences