OLTD 511- Blended Learning
|
Nov/Dec 2017
Evidence of Learning: Blended Program Assessments
Learning Outcomes Demonstrated:
- Demonstrate understanding of common terms, definitions, and models related to blended learning
- Develop a theoretical understanding of blended learning and the models associated with it
- Examine specific case studies of blended learning and assess their ability to engage a variety of learners
- Critically assess and evaluate resources for best practice in blended learning
- Engage in reflection of your readings, practice, and learnings throughout the course
Reflection to Support Evidence:
he Blended Learning Program Assessment assignment tasked us with viewing 15 video overviews of different American blended learning schools or programs, and ranking our chosen top 10 based on a specific set of criteria. I provided a rationale for each of my decisions, and included specific evidence from the videos to support my choices and the rankings.
To begin, I had to reflect on my own values and preferences. Having the added criterion of “would you send your own children to this school” really impacted me, as I realized that what I want for my own children isn’t what is necessarily best for all students. This forced me to acknowledge the privilege that my children enjoy, and reinforcing that you need to know your clientele and base your program around the students and their needs. Certainly, one of the benefits of a blended program is that it allows for easier differentiation for learners, so children like mine, who have a privileged upbringing and no learning difficulties could experience acceleration and challenging programs while others in their same age grouping can have the supports that they need. In the introduction to Blended: Using Disruptive Innovation to Improve Schools, (2015, p.xxvi) the authors state, “that if we hope to have all children succeed in school and life, then we need to be able to customize - or personalize - an education for each student’s distinct learning needs.”
Once I got into the meat of the assignment, I realized that I had to have a strong understanding of the different models and their implications to be able to rank these programs. I was able to assess their ability to engage different learners, while constantly reflecting back on whether this school feels like a good fit for my children. The criteria provided helped me focus my critical assessment on the many elements that comprise a blended learning program, rather than sticking to my instincts, which tended to revolve mostly around how many hours of PE the students receive and how opportunities for play and creative collaboration are built into the design.
By the time I had completed the final product, I had a strong sense of best practice in the blended learning field. For example, having quick ways to use data to inform learning plans, and having strong structures in place for the assessment and evaluation of student learning are two areas that I think are crucial and I want to work to develop in my own teaching practice. I was also able to reflect on which of the models looked reasonable and achievable within my context (thanks, but no thanks, Avenues World School). I did have some difficulty differentiating between the value of three of the programs, but slating them in as tied in rank solved this problem.
Many of these learning outcomes connect to my current practice and context, as I work in a school that is technically DL, but that has lots of opportunity for face to face interactions. I enrolled in the OLTD program to try to make improvements to my own school and to increase student satisfaction and success, and many of the case studies explored in OLTD 511 have given me ideas to try and to explore further.
Horn, M.B. & Staker, H. (2015). Blended : using disruptive innovation to improve schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
To begin, I had to reflect on my own values and preferences. Having the added criterion of “would you send your own children to this school” really impacted me, as I realized that what I want for my own children isn’t what is necessarily best for all students. This forced me to acknowledge the privilege that my children enjoy, and reinforcing that you need to know your clientele and base your program around the students and their needs. Certainly, one of the benefits of a blended program is that it allows for easier differentiation for learners, so children like mine, who have a privileged upbringing and no learning difficulties could experience acceleration and challenging programs while others in their same age grouping can have the supports that they need. In the introduction to Blended: Using Disruptive Innovation to Improve Schools, (2015, p.xxvi) the authors state, “that if we hope to have all children succeed in school and life, then we need to be able to customize - or personalize - an education for each student’s distinct learning needs.”
Once I got into the meat of the assignment, I realized that I had to have a strong understanding of the different models and their implications to be able to rank these programs. I was able to assess their ability to engage different learners, while constantly reflecting back on whether this school feels like a good fit for my children. The criteria provided helped me focus my critical assessment on the many elements that comprise a blended learning program, rather than sticking to my instincts, which tended to revolve mostly around how many hours of PE the students receive and how opportunities for play and creative collaboration are built into the design.
By the time I had completed the final product, I had a strong sense of best practice in the blended learning field. For example, having quick ways to use data to inform learning plans, and having strong structures in place for the assessment and evaluation of student learning are two areas that I think are crucial and I want to work to develop in my own teaching practice. I was also able to reflect on which of the models looked reasonable and achievable within my context (thanks, but no thanks, Avenues World School). I did have some difficulty differentiating between the value of three of the programs, but slating them in as tied in rank solved this problem.
Many of these learning outcomes connect to my current practice and context, as I work in a school that is technically DL, but that has lots of opportunity for face to face interactions. I enrolled in the OLTD program to try to make improvements to my own school and to increase student satisfaction and success, and many of the case studies explored in OLTD 511 have given me ideas to try and to explore further.
Horn, M.B. & Staker, H. (2015). Blended : using disruptive innovation to improve schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Evidence of Learning: Major Inquiry Project
Learning Outcomes Demonstrated:
- Demonstrate understanding of common terms, definitions, and models related to blended learning
- Develop a theoretical understanding of blended learning and the models associated with it
- Develop blended environments/programs that maximize the positives of both online and face to face environments
- Create blended structures that fit in your potential or existing teaching environment
- Demonstrate basic competency with design and implementation withing a variety of online learning environments and tools
- Engage in building learning communities and communities of practice
- Work and become familiar with Google+ Communities and Google Tools
- Critically assess and evaluate resources for best practice in blended learning
- Engage in reflection of your readings, practice, and learnings throughout the course
- Demonstrate understanding of common terms, definitions, and models related to blended learning
- Develop a theoretical understanding of blended learning and the models associated with it
- Develop blended environments/programs that maximize the positives of both online and face to face environments
- Create blended structures that fit in your potential or existing teaching environment
- Demonstrate basic competency with design and implementation withing a variety of online learning environments and tools
- Engage in building learning communities and communities of practice
- Work and become familiar with Google+ Communities and Google Tools
- Critically assess and evaluate resources for best practice in blended learning
- Engage in reflection of your readings, practice, and learnings throughout the course
Reflection to Support Evidence
For the second learning artifact in OLTD 511, I have chosen the project that required the most effort and demonstration of understanding. This major inquiry project had use asking the following critical question: how do you design the ideal blended learning environment? I chose to work independently so as to best fit this work to my own work context, as this is an initiative I would like to move forward with in my district. The inquiry project led me through the design process and had me analyzing and exploring many different elements of a blended learning program, including:
- my goals for the initiative
- the team I would need to work with to make it happen
- the student experience, the teacher experience
- hardware, software and physical layout
- the blended learning model and structures and supports needed to have it run effectively
- how to build positive school culture
- cost management strategies
As it turns out, working independently made this a huge undertaking, but the content categories helped me stay on track and chunk the task to make it feel less overwhelming. I’m content with the product, but feel that I missed out by not having collaborated with someone. I learned that I enjoy the freedom of working on my own, but that I may have underestimated the level of effort this would require at a difficult time of year! Luckily I still benefited from the learning community that we have established on Google+, where I was able to glean useful tidbits from the articles my cohort was sharing, and to bounce ideas related to the project off the members of my community of practice.
This inquiry allowed me to take the "Blenderize" assignment from Week 3 to the next level, and I relished this opportunity for extension, especially as this is something that I would like to bring to life rather than putting it away and having it stay theoretical. Knowing that our district wants to make some changes to the program focused my learning immensely. I had to construct deep understandings of the elements of blended learning in order to select and describe what would be ideal, and this challenged me to let go of some of my worries and paradigms.
I found it difficult to adapt a DL program to blended for a number of reasons. I worry that my students, who have selected this program because they don’t need to physically attend, might balk at the idea of having a more structured Flex Model structure and calendar. Horn & Staker (2015) discuss the notion of innovation in terms of disrupting the status quo or attempting to meet the needs of non-consumers, and my gut tells me that switching to a Flex model actually forces some of our non-consumers from the DL world back into something more resembling the traditional classroom. That said, I do think that the Flex model I’ve outlined in my project would work better for the majority of students, and that the provision of a Graduated Learner “licensing” program that allows for gradual release of responsibility and ultimate student control over all four elements of place, pace, path and time would be the structure required to support students on their journey to be independent learners capable of being successful in nearly any learning environment.
There have always been elements of my practice as an online teacher that have struck me as inefficient, and using adaptive software to inform student learning progress is one way that could help me focus better on relationships and keeping the learning student-centered. The ability of computers to aggregate data is one that all teachers could benefit from making better use of.
Another massive personal takeaway for me is the importance of truly understanding why blended learning represents a solution to problems inherent in the factory style traditional classroom. Horn and Staker (2015) do a wonderful job elaborating on these reasons, including the importance of being able to progress according to real learning achievements instead of how much time you’ve spent in your seat, and the importance of using different modalities to best suit the learning needs of diverse individuals. Most importantly, if we are to actually make disruptive innovations, meaning changes that challenge our very understanding of what school looks like, we have to have strong convictions and the theoretical background to continue rallying support in the face of opposition. School leadership and culture play a massive role in this, and I appreciate the direction much of our Google+ conversations took regarding leadership and the teacher experience. As Bailey et al (2015) remind us, “The process of building and maintaining support will be enhanced by continually reminding each group of the overall learning shifts that form the foundation for the shift to blended learning” (p.15).
Many teachers have faced the problem of trying to solve the learner differentiation “problem” within the confines of the factory-school paradigm. We have identified that 21st century learning skills exist, but we seem, as a whole, to have difficulty determining how to reconcile these with our paradigm of what school looks like. I think much of this is due to current funding models and come from top-down directives (and the reporting order), and of course relate to what I view as the major hypocrisy in the educational system today, i.e. our students should have growth mindsets and learn to embrace failure, while the system itself marches the children along with their age peers regardless of learning achievements, reinforcing that failure is actually bad and should be avoided. My dream is that a switch to blended learning programs in more districts (and the changes in funding and reporting that will have to accompany this switch), will allow for competency-based advancement, and allow our students the time and the freedom to actually learn at their own paces, which giving them the social support and time for play that they each individually deserve.
Bailey, J., Duty, L., Ellis, S., Martin, N., Mohammed, S., Owens, D., Rabbitt, B., Rodriguez, L., Schneider, C., Terman, A., Vander Ark, T., Wolfe, J. (2015) Blended learning implementation guide 3.0. DLN Smart Series. [PDF] Retrieved from http://digitallearningnow.com/policy/publications/smart-series/
Horn, M.B. & Staker, H. (2015). Blended : using disruptive innovation to improve schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
- my goals for the initiative
- the team I would need to work with to make it happen
- the student experience, the teacher experience
- hardware, software and physical layout
- the blended learning model and structures and supports needed to have it run effectively
- how to build positive school culture
- cost management strategies
As it turns out, working independently made this a huge undertaking, but the content categories helped me stay on track and chunk the task to make it feel less overwhelming. I’m content with the product, but feel that I missed out by not having collaborated with someone. I learned that I enjoy the freedom of working on my own, but that I may have underestimated the level of effort this would require at a difficult time of year! Luckily I still benefited from the learning community that we have established on Google+, where I was able to glean useful tidbits from the articles my cohort was sharing, and to bounce ideas related to the project off the members of my community of practice.
This inquiry allowed me to take the "Blenderize" assignment from Week 3 to the next level, and I relished this opportunity for extension, especially as this is something that I would like to bring to life rather than putting it away and having it stay theoretical. Knowing that our district wants to make some changes to the program focused my learning immensely. I had to construct deep understandings of the elements of blended learning in order to select and describe what would be ideal, and this challenged me to let go of some of my worries and paradigms.
I found it difficult to adapt a DL program to blended for a number of reasons. I worry that my students, who have selected this program because they don’t need to physically attend, might balk at the idea of having a more structured Flex Model structure and calendar. Horn & Staker (2015) discuss the notion of innovation in terms of disrupting the status quo or attempting to meet the needs of non-consumers, and my gut tells me that switching to a Flex model actually forces some of our non-consumers from the DL world back into something more resembling the traditional classroom. That said, I do think that the Flex model I’ve outlined in my project would work better for the majority of students, and that the provision of a Graduated Learner “licensing” program that allows for gradual release of responsibility and ultimate student control over all four elements of place, pace, path and time would be the structure required to support students on their journey to be independent learners capable of being successful in nearly any learning environment.
There have always been elements of my practice as an online teacher that have struck me as inefficient, and using adaptive software to inform student learning progress is one way that could help me focus better on relationships and keeping the learning student-centered. The ability of computers to aggregate data is one that all teachers could benefit from making better use of.
Another massive personal takeaway for me is the importance of truly understanding why blended learning represents a solution to problems inherent in the factory style traditional classroom. Horn and Staker (2015) do a wonderful job elaborating on these reasons, including the importance of being able to progress according to real learning achievements instead of how much time you’ve spent in your seat, and the importance of using different modalities to best suit the learning needs of diverse individuals. Most importantly, if we are to actually make disruptive innovations, meaning changes that challenge our very understanding of what school looks like, we have to have strong convictions and the theoretical background to continue rallying support in the face of opposition. School leadership and culture play a massive role in this, and I appreciate the direction much of our Google+ conversations took regarding leadership and the teacher experience. As Bailey et al (2015) remind us, “The process of building and maintaining support will be enhanced by continually reminding each group of the overall learning shifts that form the foundation for the shift to blended learning” (p.15).
Many teachers have faced the problem of trying to solve the learner differentiation “problem” within the confines of the factory-school paradigm. We have identified that 21st century learning skills exist, but we seem, as a whole, to have difficulty determining how to reconcile these with our paradigm of what school looks like. I think much of this is due to current funding models and come from top-down directives (and the reporting order), and of course relate to what I view as the major hypocrisy in the educational system today, i.e. our students should have growth mindsets and learn to embrace failure, while the system itself marches the children along with their age peers regardless of learning achievements, reinforcing that failure is actually bad and should be avoided. My dream is that a switch to blended learning programs in more districts (and the changes in funding and reporting that will have to accompany this switch), will allow for competency-based advancement, and allow our students the time and the freedom to actually learn at their own paces, which giving them the social support and time for play that they each individually deserve.
Bailey, J., Duty, L., Ellis, S., Martin, N., Mohammed, S., Owens, D., Rabbitt, B., Rodriguez, L., Schneider, C., Terman, A., Vander Ark, T., Wolfe, J. (2015) Blended learning implementation guide 3.0. DLN Smart Series. [PDF] Retrieved from http://digitallearningnow.com/policy/publications/smart-series/
Horn, M.B. & Staker, H. (2015). Blended : using disruptive innovation to improve schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Photo: Weebly Stock