Introduction
In recent years, there has been a dramatic preference among students for online learning in place of face-to-face classes. However, the hybrid format of providing education appears to be gaining increased popularity. In this regard, a number of researchers have documented the preference for a learning experience that incorporates the conventional, face-to-face mode of education delivery with online activities (Marcketti & Yurchisin, 2005; Tang & Byrne, 2007).
Henize and Procter (2006) contends that a hybrid course is “not simply a matter of the combination of face-to-face and online instruction but it has to have elements of social interaction” (p. 247). While comparing online classes with the traditional face-to-face classes, most researchers reports of a lack of a significant difference in as far as the course outcome for the two is concerned (Newlin, Lavooy, & Wang, 2005; Papastrergiou, 2006; Shelley, Swartz, & Cole, 2007).
Following the adoption of readily available technologies in the education sector, this has resulted in the recognition and incorporation of the hybrid instructions with the conventional approaches and the novel technological applications to education.
Thanks to the high level of flexibility that characterizes a blended solution of learning, it has now become far much easier to make use of diverse forms of learning objects (Nash, 2005). However, there appears to be limited knowledge in as far as the pragmatic consequences of the hybrid design are concerned.
In their study, Amrein-Beardsley, Foulger, and Meredith Toth (2007) reports how the implementation of a hybrid program, a decisive exchange of information among the administration, the faculty, and the students resulted in an enhanced understanding of the individual realities that each of the three groups was faced with.
The initial conversations resulted in a better comprehension of the contributions practices that the instructors and the administrators thought were crucial for the success of students enrolled in the hybrid degree program.
In his study, Sen (2008) reveals how the students in a hybrid class that he was investigating enjoyed limited time for practice with the nearby instructor.
When students were involved in difficult activities, there was no instructor to help in identifying the problem and as such, he could not offer the much needed guidance towards the attainment of the solution; rather, the students who were faced with such a difficulty sought to invest more in the assignments at hand with a view to overcoming the challenges facing them all on their own. There was also a lack of an immediate response to a problem faced by a student from the instructor, unlike in the case of face-to-face class.
Problem Statement
It is important to note that the educational needs of an adult learner are different from those of the conventional students due to the diversity in the teaching approach to the two groups. There are a number of challenges often faced by the face-to-face classes in as far as the issue of increased student retention and enrollments are concerned.
As a result of this decline, this has negatively impacted on the retention and enrollment of the graduate non-conventional adult student population who wish to enroll public administration degree studies.
The problem has been compounded by such factors as an observed less engagement of the adult students in the instruction methodologies, the preference by the adult students for a specific method of instruction in place of another, along with the over learning experience.
Significance
In examining the significance of implementing blended/hybrid classes, the study shall embrace the application of instructor and student data for purposes of informing the process of decision making. In addition, the implementation of blended/hybrid classes calls from an assessment of the instructors and student perception of the design of the hybrid instruction and course design, along with the administrative directives to enable the researcher better understand the individual concerns of each group.
A full implementation of a blended/hybrid degree program leads to an accommodation of the needs of the modern day student through the provision of a flexible and accessible program (Bonk, Olson, Wisher, & Orvis, 2002; Graham, Allen, & Ure, 2003; Sikora, 2002).
This is especially vital in a case whereby students have opted to assume multiple courses for completion in a given semester, in effect prompting them to schedule their internships and classes in such a manner at to enable them fully support their demanding schedule.
Purpose of the study
The aim of the study is to examine the significance of implementing blended/hybrid classes. This way, the study endeavors to provide best practices for application in blended/hybrid learning classes, along with its implication on the retention and enrolment in the face-to-face model of classroom setting.
Reference List
Amrein-Beardsley, A., Foulger, T. S., & Toth, M. (2007). Examining the development of a hybrid degree program: using student and instructor data to inform decision- making. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 9(4), 331-357
Bonk, C , Olson, T., Wisher, R., & Orvis, K. (2002). Learning from focus groups: An examination of blended learning. Journal of Distance Education, 77(3), 97-118.
Graham, C. R., Allen, S., & Ure, D. (2005). Benefits and challenges of blended learning environments. In M. Khosrow-Pour (Ed.), Encyclopedia of information science and technology (pp. 253-259). Hershey, PA: Idea Group
Heinze, A., & Procter, C. (2006). Online communication and information technology education. Journal of Information Technology Education 5, 235-249. Retrieved from http://jite.org/documents/Vol5/v5p235-249Heinze156.pdf
Marcketti, S. B., & Yurchisin, J. (2005). Student perceptions of a hybrid course. Academic Exchange Quarterly,9(3), 317-320.
Nash, S. S. (2005). Learning Objects, Learning Object Repositories, and Learning Theory: Preliminary Best Practices for Online Courses. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 1, 1-12.
Newlin, M. H., Lavooy, M. J., & Wang, A. Y. (2005). An experimental comparison of conventional and web-based instructional formats. North American Journal of Psychology, 7, 327-336.
Papastergiou, M. (2006). Course management systems as tools for the creation of online learning environments: Evaluation from a social constructivist perspective and implications for their design. International Journal on E-Learning, 5(4), 593-622.
Sen, G. J. (2008). Comparison of Face-To-Face and Hybrid Delivery of a Course that Requires Technology Skills Development. Journal of Information Technology Education,7,1-18
Shelley, D. J., Swartz, L. B., & Cole, M. T. (2007). A comparative analysis of online and traditional undergraduate business law classes. International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education, 3(1), 10-21.
Tang, M., & Byrne, R. (2007). Regular versus online versus blended: A qualitative description of the advantages of the electronic modes and a quantitative evaluation. International Journal on E-Learning,6(2), 257-266.