Drs. Cassidy and Spohrer will give an update on the Next Generation Learning Challenges Wave I grant-funded study of blended learning, including an overview of preliminary findings from courses taught at our partner colleges over the 2012-2013 academic year. We will also present and discuss possible next steps for 2013-2014

Cassidy, Kimberly

Spohrer, Jennifer

English

Scholarship;  Research;  and Creative Work at Bryn Mawr College

Bryn Mawr College
Scholarship, Research, and Creative Work at Bryn Mawr
College
Blended Learning in the Liberal Arts Conference 2013 Conference Archives
May 20th, 9:00 AM - 10:15 AM
Keynote: NGLC Blended Learning Study Report
and Where Do We Go from Here?
Kimberly Cassidy
Bryn Mawr College, kcassidy@brynmawr.edu
Jennifer Spohrer
Bryn Mawr College, jspohrer@brynmawr.edu
Follow this and additional works at: http://repository.brynmawr.edu/blended_learning
Part of the Curriculum and Instruction Commons, Educational Assessment, Evaluation, and
Research Commons, Educational Methods Commons, and the Higher Education and Teaching
Commons
Let us know how access to this document benefits you.
This paper is posted at Scholarship, Research, and Creative Work at Bryn Mawr College. http://repository.brynmawr.edu/blended_learning/2013/
2013/1
For more information, please contact repository@brynmawr.edu.
Cassidy, Kimberly and Spohrer, Jennifer, "Keynote: NGLC Blended Learning Study Report and Where Do We Go from Here?"
(2013). Blended Learning in the Liberal Arts Conference. 1.
http://repository.brynmawr.edu/blended_learning/2013/2013/1
 
NGLC Blended Learning Study Report 
and Where Do We Go from Here? 
 
Blended Learning in the Liberal Arts Conference • 20 May 2013 
OVERVIEW 
NGLC Blended Learning Study Report 
Why Blended Learning? 
● Idea for study came from discussions of blended 
learning among LAC deans 
● Research on blended learning suggested it was 
extremely effective 
● Higher satisfaction with blended courses1 
● Greater student engagement2 
● Improved student performance3 
 
But, Studies at Large Institutions 
● Would blended learning offer the same or 
equivalent benefits at a liberal arts college? 
● Ex. Student satisfaction related to reduced “seat time” 
● Ex. Control courses vs. typical LAC course 
● Was it compatible with culture and values of 
liberal art colleges? 
Goals of the Study 
1. Encourage and support faculty experimentation 
● 14 Bryn Mawr faculty, 2011-2012 
● 40 faculty at 25 partner colleges, 2012-2013 
2. Collect and analyze data on these experiments 
● Faculty and student perceptions of impact 
● Quantitative assessment of impact (where possible) 
Research sponsored by a grant from 
What do we mean by “blended”? 
1. Students receive feedback on learning 
outside classroom through computer-based 
materials 
2. Extra-classroom component alters or informs 
how instructor uses class time 
 
No Other Prescriptions 
● No requirement to reduce “seat” time 
● Faculty identify pedagogical challenges & goals 
● Pedagogy drives technology 
Kinds of Courses Developed 
Subjects 
Anthropology 
Art History 
Biochemistry 
Business 
Biochemistry 
Chemistry  
Comp. Science 
Economics 
Education 
Engineering 
Geosciences 
History 
Mathematics 
Neuroscience 
Physics  
Political Science 
Psychology 
Sociology 
Spanish 
 
See our website for course descriptions, syllabi, and links to resources used. 
Summary of Findings 
1. Blending can improve learning outcomes in LACs 
2. Faculty and students find it useful and consistent 
with LAC values 
3. Keys to success: 
a. Pedagogy drives technology 
b. Focus on mitigating “start up costs” 
[ “Swarthmore College gets it” ] 
 
POSITIVE IMPACT ON 
STUDENT LEARNING 
NGLC Blended Learning Study Report 
Merit Completion Rates* 
● 85% for all BMC blended courses in piloted 
study 
● 93.5% for piloted gateway STEM courses 
● vs. 83% average for non-blended gateway STEM 
courses 
*Proportion completing with grade of 2.0 or higher required for credit toward major.  
Improvement over  
Historical Norms 
● Historical comparison possible for four courses at BMC:  
BIOL101, CHEM101, CHEM103, GEOL202 
● In blended version of three  
BIOL101, CHEM101 and GEOL202 
● Average grade was ~ 1 std. dev. higher 
● Merit completion rate was 100%, which was 
0.8-1.5 std. dev. higher 
4th Course: CHEM103 
● Mixed results when compared to historical data 
● Average grade .2 std. dev. higher 
● Merit completion rate was 87.2%, which was 
0.5 std. dev. LOWER 
● But, analysis of learning data suggests online 
materials did have strong positive impact 
4th Course: CHEM103 
● Strong correlation between % online material completed 
and final grade based on exams (r(60)=.417, p<.001)  
● For undergraduates, adding completion rate better 
predicted final grade than SATM alone 
● SATM + % completed: R2 = .58 (F(2, 36) = 15.87, p < .001)  
● SATM alone: R2 = .30 (F(1, 37) = 24.98, p <.001) 
● Similarly strong correlation observed in smaller course at 
partner college (r(17)=.884, p<.001) 
 
Summary 
● Students who do their homework consistently 
fare better 
● Probably not unique to blended courses, but 
● Patterns more visible with online assessment 
● Online assessments graded more quickly so students 
know sooner  
● Amount of formative assessment often increased 
FACULTY PERSPECTIVES 
NGLC Blended Learning Study Report 
Strong Faculty Uptake 
● All faculty in Bryn Mawr pilot have continued 
● Majority of respondents from partners have/will 
● Often report carrying tools/techniques over into 
other courses 
● At BMC, visible experimentation outside of initial 
cohort 
• Assess more often and quickly 
• Emphasize formative 
assessment and mastery 
• Take advantage of 
• “Testing effect”4 
• Reviewing at intervals5 
Why? Formative Assessment 
● Real-time information on learning 
● Supports “agile” teaching 
● Leads to more fruitful conversations 
with students 
Why? Learning Data 
Rational Decision-Making 
● When faculty decided not to continue, it was 
through cost-benefit analysis: 
● I won’t be teaching course again/frequently 
● Available materials don’t work, and developing my 
own would be an inefficient use of my time 
● In other words: LAC faculty are rational actors 
when rejecting as well as adopting technology 
STUDENT PERSPECTIVES 
NGLC Blended Learning Study Report 
Student Feedback Mostly Positive 
Do you think the computer-based materials impacted 
(have impacted) how well you did (are doing) in this 
class? 
25% 
50% 
20% 
2% 3% 
24% 
49% 
22% 
4% 1% Yes, I did considerably better
than I would have without
them.
Yes, I think they helped
somewhat.
I don't think they really helped,
but they didn't hurt either.
 I think they had a negative
impact on how well I did.
Not sure
At Bryn Mawr              At partner colleges 
What was helpful about online 
materials? 
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
Instant
feedback
Chance to
practice on
additional
problems
Summaries
of
information
Visual
presentation
of material
Animations
or video
Chance to
explore
additional
topics
In-depth
presentation
of
information
Concepts
presented in
a new way
Audio
presentation
of material
Virtual
experiments
helped
Other
BMC
NONBMC
How did you use online materials? 
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
To prepare in
advance for a
lecture or
assignment
To complete an
assignment
To go back over
something I didn't
understand in a
lecture or
assignment
 For additional
practice
To review for
exams or quizzes
To explore on my
own
Other
BMC
NONBMC
• Can ask better questions  
• Can get help before class moves on 
• Can better structure study time 
• Like being able to practice before  
“it counts” 
• Like being able to STOP once 
they’ve gotten something 
Why? Instant Feedback 
Why? Audiovisual vs. Text 
● Animations, simulations, video 
demos, diagrams are very helpful6 
● But, not necessarily 
● Long videos 
● Videos of person talking 
● In lieu of classroom demos  
CONDITIONS FOR SUCCESS 
NGLC Study Report 
What We’ve Learned 
● Pedagogy must drive technology 
● Adoption is rational, cost-benefit analysis 
● Main barrier is heavy “start-up costs” 
● Second barrier is lack of suitable materials  
● Keep in mind factors that might limit ability to 
capitalize on investment – reusability, longevity, etc. 
 
WHERE DO WE GO NEXT? 
Continue Crowdsourcing  
to Lower Start-Up Costs 
● Annual conference / archives: 
http://repository.brynmawr.edu/blended_learning/ 
● “Tools for Blended Learning” webinar series 
specific to LAC faculty 
● New collaboration website: 
http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/exchange/blended 
Research and Development 
● Development of online course materials in areas 
of collective need/expertise (ex. research prep) 
● Continued coordination of research on impact of 
techniques, materials, etc. 
References 
 
1. C. Dziuban, J. Hartman, and P. Moskal. (2004). Blending Learning. ECAR Research Bulletin 7, 
http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ERB0407.pdf. 
2. Aspden, L.and Helm, P. (2004). Making the Connection in a Blended Learning Environment. Educational Media 
International. 41(3), 245-252. 
2. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education. Perspectives on Blended Learning in Higher Education.  
International Journal on E-Learning. 2007. 
3. Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., Jones, K. (2010).  Evaluation of Evidence-Based in Online Learning:  A 
Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies. U.S. Department of Education, Center for Technology in Learning.  
3. Lovett, M., Meyer, O., Thille, C. (2008).  The Open Learning Initiative:  Measuring the Effectiveness of the OLI Statistics 
Course in Accelerating Student Learning. Journal of Interactive Media in Education. Web. 15 Oct. 2009. 
4. Marsh, E., Agarwal, P. & Roediger, H. (2009). Memorial consequences of answering SAT questions. Journal of Educational 
Psychology: Applied, 15, 1-11.  
4. Johnson, C. & Mayer, R. (2009). A testing effect with multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 621-
629. 
4. Roediger, H. & Karpicke, J. (2006). The power of testing memory: Basic research and implications for educational practice. 
Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 181-210.  
6. Mayer, R. E. (2005). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. Cambridge, U.K.; New York: Cambridge University 
Press.  


Keynote: NGLC Blended Learning Study Report and Where Do We Go from Here?

https://repository.brynmawr.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1001&context=blended_learning

Keynote: NGLC Blended Learning Study Report and Where Do We Go from Here?

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Scholarship; Research; and Creative Work at Bryn Mawr College