1. Designing Blended Introductory
Computer Courses:
Meeting Students’ Needs While
Delivering Learning Outcomes
Maria F. Boada
Department Chair, General Education Department
Amber Epps
Assistant Department Chair, General Education Department
2. INTRODUCTION
!! Onlineeducation has grown dramatically, but
not without issues. From the critics:
!! Requires high level of self-motivation, organization
and time-management skills.
!! Higher levels of attrition (Simpson, 2003)
!! Some studies have found that students do not
consider online instruction a replacement for face-to-
face instruction (Cooper, 2001).
!! Onlineeducation evolution: acceptance and
recognition " Value, accessibility, engaged learning,
independent learning
3. INTRODUCTION
!! Blended courses, as defined by the SLOAN
Consortium, deliver 30-79% of content online
!! Blended learning aims to optimize the online and
traditional pedagogical approaches.
!! The “Blending In” report on Blended Education
(March, 2007) indicates that, as of 2007, over
50% of all colleges and universities offer blended
courses.
!! Blended learning has been used to provide
learner support and improve retention on “at
risk” students (Hughes, 2007)
4. BLENDING AT AIP
Background:
!! AiP : Campus and Online modalities.
!! Online student vs. Campus student profiles:
learning styles and needs.
!! Thus far, no blended courses have been offered.
!! AiP offers AS and BS degrees with a core General
Education curriculum.
!! A basic computer skills course, Computer
Literacy (CPU101), is a compulsory course for all
students enrolled in degree programs.
!! Why blend CPU101?
5. THE PURPOSE OF THIS STUDY
The purpose of this study was to explore the
challenges in the design and implementation of
blended Computer Literacy courses on a 5 !
week intensive format.
We compared the success in delivering learning
outcomes as well as student satisfaction between
the traditional and blended courses.
6. METHODOLOGY
Pilot Study
!! Data was collected from three sections of
Computer Literacy: two blended sections
(instructors A and B) and one traditional section
(instructor A)
!! Session length: 5 ! weeks
!! 50/50 face-to-face/online delivery breakdown.
Participants
!! Freshman students (n=43) enrolled in their first
quarter –intensive format.
!! Students were also enrolled in a second
traditional course.
8. COURSE DESIGN
!! Course designed with eCompanion
!! Online lectures (readings), discussions, and
assignments
!! Accounts for 4 hours (1 hour each) " attendance
!! Onlinereadings selected based on material
discussed in class but NOT included in text
!! Links to outside resources and articles
!! Discussions based on readings
!! Open-ended questions
!! Foster critical thinking and participation
!! Explicit requirements
9. COURSE COMPETENCIES
•!Demonstrate knowledge of system components and computer
terminology.
•!Demonstrate familiarity with input and output devices, and
networks.
•!Demonstrate the ability to use MAC or PC operating systems.
•!Demonstrate ability to perform File Management procedures.
•!Demonstrate the use of elementary software applications (word
processing, spreadsheets, and presentation software).
•!Create and edit documents using word processing software.
•!Demonstrate proficiency with spreadsheet software by utilizing
formatting commands, formulas and charting features.
•!Create a professional presentation using presentation software.
10. COURSE DESIGN
Campus Online
•!Course Intro •!Windows XP
•!Computer Concepts •!Internet Explorer 7
•!Intro to Office 2007 •!Directory Structures*
•!Word (Units A & B) •!Word (Units C & D)
•!Excel (Units A & B) •!Security, Privacy, & Ethics Online*
•!Word & Excel Integration •!Excel (Units C & D)
•!PowerPoint (Units A & B) •!Researching on the Internet*
•!Outlook/Email •!PowerPoint (Units C & D)
•!Netiquette •!Evaluating Online Info*
*online lectures
11. DATA COLLECTED
!! Grades from a final common exam was
collected across all sections.
!! The exam was sectioned into segments related
to the specific learning outcomes for the
course.
!! Student Survey responses at the end of the
course.
15. RESULTS – STUDENT FEEDBACK
#93.8% of students agreed with the statement “The blended format of
this course helped me be successful”
#87.5% of students indicated that they would like to take blended
courses in the future.
#93.3% of student responding to the survey would recommend blended
classes to other students.
#When asked what was the most beneficial aspect of the blended
format here are some of the responses:
“I was able to stay focused easier in the blended class, because I knew
that I had to pay attention so I could successfully do my homework”
“I was able to do the assignments on my own time”
16. CONCLUSIONS
!! Findings indicate that the blended course is as
effective as the traditional course in supporting
the achievement of the course competencies.
!! Average final exam scores for all applications
sections of the exam were higher in the blended
course.
!! Student surveys suggest that the combination of
face-2-face and online learning is a good fit to
their learning styles.
!! Student feedback suggests that the blended
format does not hinder the learning of computer
applications-related learning objectives.
17. WHO BENEFITS? Flexibility on
completing
course work
More opportunities for
Increased access
out-of-class
to all course Increased Computer skills practice
material faculty-
student
interaction
Students
Admin-
Institution- Facilitates
Relieve
achievement
Effective use Student’s
of computer scheduling
of existing skills difficulties
resources learning Expanded
outcomes
offerings
Faculty
…next step
18. CHALLENGES…
!! Faculty involvement " Create course content,
added time commitment.
!! Continue to balance campus/online content and
assessments.
!! Incorrect student placement.
19. WHAT’S NEXT…
!! Gather additional data for intensive quarter
courses – focus on evaluation of participation and
faculty feedback.
!! Evaluate competency-related focus for student
online participation " use for curriculum
revision
!! Implement a regular 11-week CPU101 course
blended and evaluate effectiveness
!! Evaluate the feasibility of design and
implementation of other blended Gen Ed courses
(from faculty and student feedback).
