Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Design and Assessment for Hybrid Courses: Insights and Overviews

By Felix G. Hamza-Lup and Stephen White

Abstract

Technology is influencing education, providing new\ud delivery and assessment models. A combination between online and traditional course, the hybrid (blended) course, may present a solution with many benefits as it provides a gradual transition towards technology enabled education. This research work provides a set of definitions for several course delivery approaches, and evaluates five years of data from a course that has been converted from traditional face-to-face delivery, to hybrid delivery. The collected experimental data proves that the revised course, in the hybrid delivery mode, is at least as good, if not better, than it previously was and it provides some benefits in terms of student retention

Topics: L1, LB, LB2300, LB2361, LD
Publisher: IARIA
Year: 2015
OAI identifier: oai:eprints.hud.ac.uk:27048

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. (2008). An explorative learning approach to teaching clinical anatomy using student generated content,” doi
  2. (2005). Analysis of the terminology used in the field of virtual learning,”
  3. and Program Definitions,” [Online]. Available from: www.armstrong.edu/images/office_online_learning/
  4. (2013). and The D-Team, “Reconsidering assessment in online/hybrid courses: knowing versus learning,”. doi
  5. (2000). Association. “A survey of traditional and distance learning higher education members,”
  6. Available from; www.purpletrain.com/news/
  7. (1998). Barriers to studying online for the first time: Students' perceptions,” Planning for Progress, Partnership and Profit, EdTech Conference,
  8. (2003). Blended learning environments, doi
  9. (2001). Computer-mediated discourse,” In: doi
  10. (2005). Cyber Schooling Framework: Improving Mobility and doi
  11. (2008). Designing and delivering effective online nursing courses with evolve electronic classroom,” doi
  12. Designing for Learning - How Many Students Are Just Right in a Web Course?,” [Online]. Available from: http://www.designingforlearning.info/services/writing/ number.htm,
  13. (2012). Disaggregating the components of a college degree,” American Enterprise Institute,
  14. (2005). Discussion as a way of teaching,”
  15. (2010). Distance education in an era of eLearning: challenges and opportunities for a campus-focused institution,” doi
  16. (2013). Distance education in the United States: From correspondence courses to the Internet,”
  17. (2009). Distance education: definition and glossary of terms,”
  18. e-Learning alphabet soup: a guide to terms,”
  19. (2003). Education and Employment (DfEE), “The future of higher education,”
  20. (2003). Education and Skills (DfES), “Towards a unified e-learning strategy,”
  21. Education Resources,” [Online]. Available from: www.usg.edu/facultyresources/resources/distance_edu cation_resources,
  22. (2008). Electronic delivery of lectures in the university environment: An empirical comparison of three delivery styles,” doi
  23. (2009). Evaluating college students' efforts in asynchronous discussion: a systematic process,” In
  24. (2012). Evaluation of a Blended Learning Approach Used in an Anatomy and Physiology Module for Pre-registration Healthcare Students,”
  25. (2009). Evaluation of self-regulatory online learning in a blended course for post-registration nursing students doi
  26. (2001). Exploring e-learning,” Report 376.
  27. (2009). Factors influencing faculty satisfaction with online teaching and learning doi
  28. Forecast: e-learning suites and management system software, worldwide, 2006-2011,” [Online]. Available from: www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?id.543327,
  29. Funding Council for England (HEFCE). “Enhancing Learning and Teaching Through the Use of Technology. A revised approach to Hefce's strategy for eLearning,” [Online]. Available from: www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/
  30. (2001). Health (DoH), “Working Together Learning Together: A Framework for Lifelong Learning for the NHS,” HMSO, doi
  31. (2005). How does technology-enabled active learning affect undergraduate students' understanding of electromagnetism concepts?,” doi
  32. How Government policy drives e-learning,” Elearning Magazine, [Online]. Available from: www.elearnmag.acm.org/featured.cfm?aid=1872821,
  33. How will a blended learning model improve student experience?,” [Online]. Available from: www.blendedlearning.com.au/uploadedFiles/EventRedesign/
  34. Hybrid Course Delivery:
  35. Hybrid,” [Online]. Available from: www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/hybrid,
  36. (2012). Improving measurement of productivity in higher education,” Washington: National Academics Press,
  37. (2005). Improving quality and reducing costs: The case for redesign,” Saratoga Springs: National Center for Academic Transformation,
  38. (2013). Initiatives for containing the cost of higher education,” Washington: American Enterprise Institute,
  39. (2003). Learning to Teach in Higher Education,” Routledge Falmer, London and doi
  40. (1992). Lecturing,” doi
  41. (1967). Macroeconomics of unbalanced growth: The anatomy of urban crisis,”
  42. (2009). Nurses, computers and pre-registration education,” doi
  43. Online programs: profits are there, technological innovation is not,” [Online]. Available from:
  44. (2013). Online technology and higher education,” Parkville: The Grattan,
  45. (2006). Perceptions of distance learning: A comparison of online and traditional learning,”
  46. (2007). Quality in blended learning: Exploring the relationships between on-line and face-to-face teaching and learning,” doi
  47. (2000). Student participation in a discussion-oriented online course: a case study,” doi
  48. (2002). Student perceptions as distance learners doi
  49. (2006). Students' perceptions of online learning: A comparative study,”
  50. (2005). Teaching more by lecturing less,” doi
  51. (2012). The flipped classroom,” doi
  52. (2005). Too much teaching, not enough learning: what is the solution?,” Adv.
  53. (2012). University of the future: A thousand year old industry on the cusp of profound change,”
  54. (2006). University students' selfefficacy and their attitudes toward the Internet: the role of students' doi
  55. What is Web 2.0?,” [Online]. Available from:
  56. Winning by degrees: The strategies of highly productive higher-education institutions,” [Online]. Available from: www.mckinseyonsociety.com/winning-by-degrees,

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.