06 SES 09 JS, European Perspectives on Instructional Design of eLearning
Symposium Joint Session NW 06 and NW 16
One of the major challenges in instructional design is the specification of design models for blended learning. It is complex because the emergence of blended learning environments reveals that what matters is not only specific delivery modi, learning tasks or tools within courses, but also the broader (organizational and programme) contexts in which learners are instructed. Learners construct knowledge in interaction with others and their contexts, rather than purely individually (Greeno, 1989). Both course and programme arrangements should consider learner characteristics in order to maximize learning outcomes and learners’ persistence. Furthermore, it has been suggested that blended learning is especially challenging for learners with lower learning abilities, given the extent of learner control. This study is based on the assumption that specific constellations of prior knowledge and motivation determine learners’ self-regulatory skills. High levels of prior knowledge and motivation result in improved self-regulation and enhanced abilities to take appropriate decisions in blended learning environments, which in turn result in higher learning outcomes and persistence. The opposite is true as well. Based on a thorough analysis of literature, this contribution aims at identifying the specific characteristics that facilitate or inhibit learning opportunities in blended learning environments, by identifying the key components of course and programme arrangements. The 4C/ID model is the starting point of the theoretical analysis (Van Merriënboer, 1997). With regard to self-regulation this analysis is in line with the COPES model of Winne (1997). It is expected that when more structure and follow-up are provided, learners with low self-regulation will encounter fewer problems. Not solely at the course, but also at the programme level. With regard to the latter, the interplay between the 3C model (Kerres, & De Witt, 2003) and the contextual components described by Porter and colleagues (2014) is used in the analysis.
Greeno, J. G. (1989). A perspective on thinking. American Psychologist, 44(2), 134. Kerres, M., & De Witt, C. (2003). A Didactical Framework for the Design of Blended Learning Arrangements. Journal of Educational Media, 28(2/3), 101–113. doi:10.1080/1358165032000165653 Porter, W. W., Graham, C. R., Spring, K. A., & Welch, K. R. (2014). Blended learning in higher education: Institutional adoption and implementation. Computers & Education, 75, 185–195. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.02.011 Van Merriënboer, J. J. (1997). Training complex cognitive skills: A four-component instructional design model for technical training. Educational Technology. Winne, P. H. (1997). Experimenting to bootstrap self-regulated learning. Journal of educational Psychology, 89(3), 397
The programme is updated regularly (each day in the morning)
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.