Session Information
16 SES 12 A, ICT in Primary Schools
Paper Session
Contribution
Rapid social changes have shaped the demands and challenges that education is called upon to address in recent years. With digital transformation being one of the priorities of the EU, the integration of technology in education in its various forms, such as Blended Learning (BL), is more necessary than ever. BL is the learning approach that combines face-to-face teaching in the classroom in the presence of educators and online teaching in a space outside the school. This research studies the learning environment during the implementation of BL in elementary education for fourth-grade students (aged 9-10) in a public school in an urban area of Cyprus and examines how the learning environment evolved during the COVID-19 pandemic. The research question was: How did blended learning affect the learning environment of fourth-grade students in elementary schools during the Covid-19 pandemic?
The existence of a research gap in investigating the impact of BL within learning environments in Cypriot primary education makes this research significant and necessary. The findings of the research have both practical and theoretical importance, offering guidelines for the successful implementation of BL in primary schools and contributing to clarifying research gaps and understanding the application of BL.
The literature review examined theoretical approaches that recognize the social dimension of learning, such as theories on learning environments, social practices within Communities of Practice, and the climate and culture of the classroom. In these approaches, the unique learning environment of each class significantly affects the quality of students' learning and the achievement of their learning goals. The classroom community functions as a learning community where the participation and interaction of its members are crucial for learning. Similarly, the degree of engagement in classroom practices corresponds to the different social positions a student constructs, along with the associated influences and privileges. Thus, these approaches identify common perceptions about the learning environment of the class. Specifically, the learning environment is influenced: (a) firstly, by the opportunities for interaction among its members, (b) secondly, by the opportunities for personal improvement and development given to students, and (c) thirdly, by the opportunities that create a climate of collectivity within the classroom community.
In the present research, qualitative methods were applied for the collection and analysis of data following an emergent research design. Data were collected from observations and analysis units from posts in the digital tools used, in order to achieve a deeper understanding and interpretation of how BL influenced the children's learning environment. Through the thematic analysis approach, themes were identified and analyzed from the data. The emerging themes were connected with existing theories, advancing the construction of an interpretive and theoretical framework that provides answers to the research question.
The results of the research reflect specific temporal circumstances and may not apply to different conditions, even for students with similar characteristics to the sample, although they align with the findings of other studies on the educational impacts of the pandemic. However, they do provide a representative picture of the response to the crisis brought about by the spread of the virus, which disrupted many aspects of the daily lives of educators and students.
Method
An action research was conducted in three cycles, with each cycle being revised based on the previous one. The starting point was the existing problematic situation, which concerned the forced adoption of BL as a teaching method due to the pandemic. The researcher was a female educator with experience in integrating technology into teaching but not in remote online education. A total of 63 students from three fourth-grade classes of an elementary school participated in the study. These were three different classes for which the educator was responsible over three consecutive years. For the collection of data analyzed using qualitative techniques, material was gathered from the "educator's diary," in which the educator recorded observations, reflective comments, and significant events. Additionally, material was collected from the digital tools used. Regarding the digital tools, the ClassDojo application was used for communication between educator and parents. In the first cycle, students used the school's computers and touch screens in small groups mainly for practice. During the online phase of the first cycle, students used personal devices and digital exercise tools (e.g., Forms, Kahoot, and Learning Apps). In the second cycle, face-to-face teaching included the use of Android touch screens in 1:1 conditions and even more exercise tools (e.g., wordwall, Quizizz, Liveworksheets, Pixton). During the online phase, the Microsoft Teams was used. In the third cycle, Google Classroom was used for face-to-face teaching as a learning management system, along with tools such as Google Docs, Jamboard, and Scratch. Online teaching for individual students was facilitated through Padlet, with instructions and material corresponding to classroom activities. As for the research processes, the study included three research cycles, starting with face-to-face teaching but following different paths thereafter. During the first cycle, the school year began without an emergency plan, and with the pandemic, teaching continued online through asynchronous remote education. Enriched Virtual and Self-Blend models were used. In the second cycle, the year began with face-to-face teaching and continued online using Teams and Enriched Virtual model. There was preparation to meet the learning demands of online learning. In the third cycle, online learning was individualized. Self-blend model was applied. For the analysis of the data, qualitative techniques were applied, focusing on how BL influenced the learning environment, as well as on the analysis of the educator's teaching practice based on the recorded data in the educator's diary and the posts on the digital platforms used.
Expected Outcomes
During the three cycles, different learning environments were observed, influenced by the health protocols due to the pandemic. These environments offered varied opportunities for interaction, personal development, and a sense of collectivity. In the first phase of the first cycle before the pandemic, there was a positive learning environment during face-to-face teaching (e.g., using various teaching techniques and student-centered approaches), where students had the opportunity for interaction, a sense of collectivity, and personal development. However, the unpreparedness for the transition to online teaching from face-to-face teaching caused disorganization, and the learning environment did not offer suitable opportunities for all students. In the online teaching of the second cycle, proper preparation and training led to effective online learning. The transition from traditional to online teaching was smooth, following criteria of quality implementation and effectiveness. In the face-to-face teaching with restrictive health protocols and social distancing, limited interaction was observed, and teacher-centered methods limited opportunities for personal development and collectivity. In the face-to-face teaching of the third cycle, the use of a learning management system and the integration of technology based on learning theories improved interaction among students through digital collaborative activities, "overcoming" social distances. This learning environment was shaped through the experiences and training of the previous school years. In conclusion, the success of Blended Learning depends on both effective face-to-face teaching and online learning, as they are interconnected. Therefore, to maximize the positive aspects of each phase of BL, it is necessary: - Face-to-face teaching in a learning environment that provides opportunities for interactions, personal development, and enhancement of creating a sense of collectivity. - Online teaching using learning management systems and reliable standards. - Integration of technology in all phases based on learning theories.
References
Casimir, O. A., Blake, S. C., Klosky, J. V., & Gazmararian, J. A. (2023). Adaptations to the Learning Environment for Elementary School Children in Georgia during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 1-14. Christensen, C. M., Horn, M. B., & Staker, H. (2013). Is K-12 Blended Learning Disruptive? An Introduction to the Theory of Hybrids. Clayton Christensen Institute for Disruptive Innovation. Li, S., & Wang, W. (2022). Effect of blended learning on student performance in K-12 settings: A meta-analysis. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 38(5), 1254–1272. Moos, R. H. (1973). Conceptualizations of human environments. American Psychologist, 28(8), 652–665. Pittman, J., Severino, L., DeCarlo-Tecce, M. J., & Kiosoglous, C. (2021). An action research case study: Digital equity and educational inclusion during an emergent COVID-19 divide. Journal for Multicultural Education, 15(1), 68-84. Quality Matters. (n.d.). Course Design Rubric Standards. Retrieved from: https://www.qualitymatters.org/sites/default/files/PDFs/StandardsfromtheK-12RubricFifthEdition.pdf Rachmadtullah, R., Marianus Subandowo, R., Humaira, M. A., Aliyyah, R. R., Samsudin, A., & Nurtanto, M. (2020). Use of blended learning with moodle: Study effectiveness in elementary school teacher education students during the COVID-19 pandemic. International journal of advanced science and technology, 29(7), 3272-3277. Rasheed, R. A., Kamsin, A., & Abdullah, N. A. (2020). Challenges in the online component of blended learning: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 144, 103701. Rusticus, S. A., Pashootan, T., & Mah, A. (2023). What are the key elements of a positive learning environment? Perspectives from students and faculty. Learning Environments Research, 26(1), 161-175. Singh, J., Steele, K., & Singh, L. (2021). Combining the best of online and face-to-face learning: Hybrid and blended learning approach for COVID-19, post vaccine, & post-pandemic world. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 50(2), 140-171. Staker, H., & Horn, M. B. (2012). Classifying K–12 blended learning. Retrieved from http://www.christenseninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Classifying-K-12-blended-learning.pdf Van Laer, S., & Elen, J. (2017). In search of attributes that support self-regulation in blended learning environments. Education and Information Technologies, 22, 1395-1454.
Search the ECER Programme
- 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.