Literature Review on Blended Learning

Liu+Chunmei++Indika+Liyanage

【Abstract】Although very brief， this review of the research that has been carried out over the past 15 years on blended learning shows how the field has evolved from controversial studies of the definitions to empirical studies of its teaching effects. In this article， I present the birth and rise of blended learning and described three partially overlapping categories of the studies on it.

【Key words】Blended Learning； Educational Technology； Blended Approach

The term “blended learning” has been around for over fifty years. It became popular with the rise of computers and telecommunications that enabled remote and distance learning. Although the concepts behind blended learning first developed in the 1960s， the formal terminology to describe it did not take its current form until the late 1990s. One of the earliest uses of the term appears in a 1999 press release， which mentioned that “The Company currently operates 220 on-line courses， but will begin offering its Internet courseware using the company's Blended Learning methodology.” The term “blended learning” was initially vague， including a wide variety of technologies and teaching methods in different combinations. In 2006， the term became more concrete with the publication of the first Handbook of Blended Learning by Bonk and Graham. Graham defined “blended learning systems” as learning systems that “combine face-to-face instruction with computer mediated instruction.” （Bonk and Graham， 2006）

Blended learning originated in professional development and training in Business industry （Sharma and Barrett， 2007） was then applied in higher education （MacDonald， 2006）. And finally it was employed in English language teaching （ELT） and gradually became a commonplace in ELT （Tomlinson and Whittaker， 2013）.

Three partially overlapping categories can be distinguished within blended learning research. The first category of blended learning studies consists in analysis of the definitions of blended learning. The second group of blended learning studies focuses on the comparative research on the effectiveness of blended learning and conventional classroom approach. The third body of blended learning research centers on pedagogical reform by redesigning the blending way.

I. Lack of Consensus on a Definition of Blended Learning

The literature offers many different practical definitions of blended learning （Bliuc， Goodyear， & Ellis， 2007）. According to VanDerLinden （2014）， “blended learning is broadly defined as replacing seat time in courses with online activities to achieve learning objectives.” Whether termed hybrid or blended， a key feature of this mode of instruction is that it requires a fundamental course redesign that transforms the structure and approach to student learning （Garrison & Vaughan， 2008）. Tang Jingwei （2013） introduced the different scholars' definitions of blended learning and pointed out that until now， theres no consensus on how it is defined and different terms such as “blended”， “mixed-mode” and “hybrid”， are used. TANG listed three typical definitions by some researchers such as Dziuban， Hartman and Moskal （2004）， Kekang He （2004） and Jiahou Li （2007）. Tang finally summarized the blended learning in his study as “an optimization combination which aims to include the positive aspects of face-to-face learning and online learning.” Wasoh （2016） listed the two descriptions of blended learning according to Rovia and Jordan （2004）， Colis and Moonen （2001）. Colis and Moonen stated in their study “blended learning is a hybrid of traditional face-to-face and online learning so that instruction occurs both in the classroom and online”. Maja GrGurovi? （2011） made a brief literature review of the different definitions of blended learning. He cited Thornes definition of blended learning （Thorne， 2003） “blends online learning with more traditional methods of learning and development”. Maja defined blended learning in his study as face-to-face teaching and learning supplemented by an online CALL component delivered through a learning management system （LMS）. Kevin Lothridge （2013） and his co-researchers gave a short definition “blended learning is using two or more instructional delivery methods to impart knowledge and skills to the learner.” According to So and Brush （2008）， “Generally， blended learning means any combination of learning delivery methods， including most often face-to-face instruction with asynchronous and/or synchronous computer technologies.” They agreed with Phipps & Merisotis （1999） that blended learning is the “third generation” of distance education systems， which is characterized as maximizing the best advantages of face-to-face learning and multiple technologies to deliver learning.

VanDerLinden （2014） pointed out that most colleges and universities fail to define blended learning at an institutional level and the absence of a precise definition then lends itself to blended learning becoming a mere description of a singular course rather than an institutional strategy.

II. Comparative Research on Effectiveness of Blended Learning and Conventional Classroom Approach

Previous studies comparing the effectiveness of blended learning and conventional classroom approach have reported higher achievement and attitude levels among instructors and students （Thang， Wong， Noor， 2012）. Wasoh （2016） summarized the advantages and disadvantages of blended learning by reviewing the related literatures. Some of the advantages of blended learning include cost-effectiveness for both learners and the institution. Some of the disadvantages may include computer and internet accessibility， limited knowledge in the use of technology， and lack of computer labs on university campus. Lothridge （2013） introduced the blended learning methodology which was implemented by NFSTC （National Forensic Science Technology Center） to create affordable， accessible， high-quality forensic science training. By comparing the traditional and the blended learning， Lothridge （2013） demonstrated that blending online theoretical content with hands-on practical application or mentor-based instruction is an efficient， cost-effective delivery method for workforce training.

Although most research showed the enormous advantages and potentials of blended learning comparing with the traditional face-to-face one， some concerns have been raised on its impact on students learning and development （Thang， Wong， Noor， 2012）. So and Brush （2008） examined the relationships of the students perceived levels of collaborative learning， social presence and overall satisfaction in a blended learning environment. Their research studied the relationship of these three variables and identified critical factors related to them. Thang， Wong， Noor （2012） investigated Malaysian students perceptions of the blended approach in meeting their English language needs， different proficiency levels and diverse interests for learning English for Academic Purposes.

III. Pedagogical Reform by Redesigning Blending Way

Tang Jingwei （2013） designed a blending way of learning ESL （English as a Second Language） based on Moodle platform and highlighted the learning activities of ESL blended learning including listening， speaking， reading， writing and translating activities. Maja GrGurovi? （2011） used Neumeiers （2005） framework including six parameters to describe a technology-enhanced blended-learning model. The case study examined an intermediate ESL listening and speaking class in an intensive English program. The class used a commercially available learning management system （LMS）， to combine face-to-face classroom learning （face-to-face mode） and online learning in the computer lab and for homework （CALL mode）. Majas study indicated that all language skills can be successfully integrated into both modes.

Other researchers have focused their attention on blended learning on transformational institutional strategy. For example， VanDerLinden （2014） discussed blended learning as a strategy on an institutional level rather than on the singular course basis. And he proposed the institutional approaches to blended learning and the ways in which institutions support faculty in the intentional redesign of courses to produce optimal learning. He held that blended learning was a strategic opportunity to engage in organizational learning.

In summary， the reasons why a blended learning approach has been widely employed in English language teaching mainly lie in its two advantage—improved learning effectiveness and cost effectiveness. A lack of consensus on a definition of blended learning has led to difficulties in research on its effectiveness in the classroom （Oliver and Trigwell， 2005）. There is also a growing literature base about the learning outcomes achieved through using various technologies. But， the most difficulty is finding research that specially studying blended learning as opposed to the technology itself （Tomlinson and Whittaker， 2013）.

References：

[1]Bliuc，A.，Goodyear，P.，& Ellis，R.（2007）.Research focus and methodological choices in studies into students experiences of blended learning in higher education.Internet and Higher Education，10，231-244.

[2]Bonk，C.J.and Graham，C.R.（2006）.The Handbook of Blended Learning Environments： Global Perspectives，Local Designs.San Francisco： Jossey‐Bass/Pfeiffer.p.5.

[3]Colis，B.，and Moonen，J.（2001）.Flexible Learning in a Digital World：Experiences and Expectations.London：Kogan page.Elliot，D.（2009）.Internet Technologies and Language Teacher Education.

[4]Dziuban，C.D.，Hartman，J.L.，&Moskal，P.D.（2004）.Blended Learning.Education Center for Applied Research Bulletin，7，112.

[5]Garrison，D.and Vaughan，N.（2008）.Blended learning in higher education.San Francisco，CA： Jossey-Bass.

[6]GrGurovi?，M.（2011）.Blended learning in an ESL class：A Case Study.CALICO Journal，29（1），100-117.

[7]He，K.（2004）.Blending Learning and the Development of Educational Technology Theory.Educational Technology of China，（3），5-14.

[8]Li，J.（2007）.Establishing an Environment of Information Courses.Shanghai： Huadong Normal University Publishing Press.

[9]Lothridge，K.，F(xiàn)ox，J.，& Fynan，E.（2013）.Blended learning： efficient，timely and cost effective.Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences，45（4），407-416.

[10]MacDonald，J.（2006）Blended Learning and Online Tutoring.Aldershot，Hampshire： Gower.

[11]Neumeier，P.（2005）.A closer look at blended learning： Parameters for designing a blended learning environment for language teaching and learning.ReCALL，17，163–178.

[12]Oliver，M.and Trigwell，K.（2005）.Can 'Blended Learning' Be Redeemed？.E-Learning.2（1）：17–26.

[13]Phipps，R.，and Merisotis，J.（1999）.Whats the difference？ A review of contemporary research on the effectiveness of distance learning in higher education.Washington，DC： The Institute for Higher Education Policy.

[14]Rovia，A.P.，and Jordan，H.（2004）.Blended Learning and Sense of Community： A Comparative analysis with traditional and fully online graduate courses.Regent University USA.

[15]Sharma，P.and Barrett，B.（2007）Blended Learning.Oxford： Macmillian.

[16]So，H.& Brush，A.T.（2008）.Student perceptions of collaborative learning，social presence and satisfaction in a blended learning environment： Relationships and critical factors.Computers & Education，（51），318-336.

[17]Tang，J.（2013）.The Research on Blended Learning of ESL Based on Moodle Platform.Studies in Literature and Language，6 （2），30-34.

[18]Thang，S.M.，Wong，F(xiàn).F.，Noor，N.M.，et al.（2012）.Using a blended approach to teach English for academic purposes： Malaysian students perceptions of redesigned course materials.International Journal of Pedagogies and Learning，7（2），142–153.

[19]Thorne，K.（2003）.Blended learning： How to integrate online and traditional learning.London： Kogan Page.

[20]Tomlinson，B.and Whittaker，C.（2013）.Blended Learning in English Language Teaching： Course Design and Implementation.London： British Council.

[21]VanDerLinden，K.（2014）.Blended learning as transformational institutional learning.New Directions for Higher Education， （165），75-85.

[22]Wasoh，F(xiàn).（2016）.Exploring the roles of blended learning as an approach to improve teaching and learning English.Proceedings of the Multidisciplinary Academic Conference，165-171.

作者簡(jiǎn)介：

劉春妹（1985-），女，漢族，江蘇鹽城人，講師，碩士，主要從事醫(yī)藥英語(yǔ)研究。

Indika Liyanage，澳大利亞迪肯大學(xué)人文與教育學(xué)院副教授、博導(dǎo)，主要從事研究英語(yǔ)為第二語(yǔ)言或外語(yǔ)的教學(xué)法研究。