4.7 Article

Effective instructional strategies and technology use in blended learning: A case study

Journal

EDUCATION AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES
Volume 26, Issue 5, Pages 6143-6161

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10639-021-10544-w

Keywords

Instructional strategies; Learning technology; Blended learning; Blended courses

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This case study investigated effective instructional strategies and technology use in blended learning in a graduate course in the USA. The findings highlighted the importance of real-time interactions with peers and immediate feedback from peers and the instructor in motivating learners and improving the quality of their work. Learning technologies played a critical role in blended learning, but should be simplified and streamlined to reduce learners' cognitive load.
This case study explored effective instructional strategies and technology use in blended learning (BL) in a graduate course in the USA. Varied forms of data were collected, including (1) semi-structured interviews with students, (2) mid-term and final course evaluations, (3) two rounds of online debates, (4) four weeks of online reflection journals, and (5) the instructor's reflections. Thematical analysis and descriptive statistics were conducted to analyze qualitative and quantitative data respectively. Multiple methods were employed to establish trustworthiness of the study. Effective and ineffective instructional strategies and technology uses were identified in BL. The findings indicated that students valued real-time interactions with peers and the instructor. However, inappropriate asynchronous discussions were considered less effective in BL. In addition, immediate feedback from peers and the instructor motivated learners and improved the quality of their work. Learning technologies played a critical role in BL, but the use of learning technologies should be simplified and streamlined. Technical support was essential to reduce learners' cognitive load.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available