Building Effective Blended Learning Programs

The first generation of e-learning or Web-based learning programs focused on presenting physical
classroom-based instructional content over the Internet. Furthermore, firstgeneration e-learning (digitally
delivered learning) programs tended to be a repetition or compilation of online versions of classroom-
based courses. The experience gained from the first-generation of e-learning, often riddled with long
sequences of ‘page-turner’ content and pointand-click quizzes, is giving rise to the realization that a single
mode of instructional delivery may not provide sufficient choices, engagement, social contact, relevance,
and context needed to facilitate successful learning and performance. In the second wave of e-learning,
increasing numbers of learning designers are experimenting with blended learning models that combine
various delivery modes. Anecdotal evidence indicates that blended learning not only offers more choices
but also is more effective.

This article has two objectives: 1. To provide a comprehensive view of blended learning and discuss
possible dimensions and ingredients (learning delivery methods) of blended learning programs. 2. To
provide a model to create the appropriate blend by ensuring that each ingredient, individually and
collectively, adds to a meaningful learning experience. Badrul Khan’s blended e-learning framework,
referred to here as Khan’s Octagonal Framework (see Figure 1) enables one to select appropriate
ingredients (http://BooksToRead.com/framework). Khan’s framework serves as a guide to plan, develop,
deliver, manage, and evaluate blended learning programs. Organizations exploring strategies for effective
learning and performance have to consider a variety of issues to ensure effective delivery of learning and
thus a high return on investment.

Blended Learning Learning requirements and preferences of each learner tend to be different.
Organizations must use a blend of learning approaches in their strategies to get the right content in the
right format to the right people at the right time. Blended learning combines multiple delivery media that
are designed to complement each other and promote learning and application-learned behavior. Blended
learning programs may include several forms of learning tools, such as real-time virtual/ collaboration
software, self-paced Web-based courses, electronic performance support systems (EPSS) embedded
within the job-task environment, and knowledge management systems. Blended learning mixes various
event-based activities, including face-to-face classrooms, live elearning, and self-paced learning. This
often is a mix of traditional instructor-led training, synchronous online conferencing or training,
asynchronous self-paced study, and structured on-the-job training from an experienced worker or
mentor.

Dimensions of the Blend

The original use of the phrase “blended learning” was often associated with simply linking traditional
classroom training to e-learning activities, such as asynchronous work (typically accessed by learners
outside the class at their own time and pace). However, the term has evolved to encompass a much richer
set of learning strategies or “dimensions.” Today a blended learning program may combine one or more
of the following dimensions, although many of these have over-lapping attributes.
Blending Offline and Online Learning

At the simplest level, a blended learning experience combines offline and online forms of learning where
the online learning usually means “over the Internet or Intranet” and offline learning happens in a more
traditional classroom setting. We assume that even the offline learning offerings are managed through an
online learning system. An example of this type of blending may include a learning program that provides
study materials and research resources over the Web, while providing instructor-led, classroom training
sessions as the main medium of instruction.

Blending Self-Paced and Live, Collaborative LearningY

Self-paced learning implies solitary, on-demand learning at a pace that is managed or controlled by the
learner. Collaborative learning, on the other hand, implies a more dynamic communication among many
learners that brings about knowledge sharing. The blending of selfpaced and collaborative learning may
include review of important literature on a regulatory change or new product followed by a moderated,
live, online, peer-to-peer discussion of the material’s application to the learner’s job and customers.
Blending Structured and Unstructured Learning

Not all forms of learning imply a premeditated, structured, or formal learning program with organized
content in specific sequence like chapters in a textbook. In fact, most learning in the workplace occurs in
an unstructured form via meetings, hallway conversations, or e-mail. A blended program design may look
to actively capture conversations and documents from unstructured learning events into knowledge
repositories available ondemand, supporting the way knowledge-workers collaborate and work.

Blending Custom Content with Off-the-Shelf Content

Off-the-shelf content is by definition generic—unaware of an organization’s unique context and

Blending Learning, Practice, and Performance Support

Perhaps the finest form of blended learning is to supplement learning (organized prior to beginning a new
job-task) with practice (using job-task or business process simulation models) and just-in-time
performance support tools that facilitate the appropriate execution of job-tasks. Cutting-edge
productivity tools provide ‘workspace’ environments that package together the computer based work,
collaboration, and performance support tools.

Why Blend? The Benefits of Blending

Blended learning is not new. However, in the past, blended learning was comprised of physical classroom
formats, such as lectures, labs, books, or handouts. Today, organizations have a myriad of learning
approaches and choices. Some of these are shown in Table 1. The concept of blended learning is rooted
in the idea that learning is not just a one-time event—learning is a continuous process. Blending provides
various benefits over using any single learning delivery medium alone.

Extending the Reach

A single delivery mode inevitably limits the reach of a learning program or critical knowledge transfer in
some form or fashion. For example, a physical classroomtraining program limits the access to only those
who can participate at a fixed time and location, whereas a virtual classroom event is inclusive of remote
audiences and, when followed up with recorded knowledge objects (ability to playback a recorded live
event), can extend the reach to those who could not attend at a specific time.

Optimizing Development Cost and Time

Combining different delivery modes has the potential to balance out and optimize the learning program
development and deployment costs and time. A totally online, self-paced, media-rich, Web-based training
content may be too expensive to produce (requiring multiple resources and skills), but combining virtual
collaborative and coaching sessions with simpler self-paced materials, such as generic off-the-shelf WBT,
documents, case studies, recorded e-learning events, text assignments, and PowerPoint presentations
(requiring quicker turn-around time and lower skill to produce) may be just as effective or even more
effective.

Evidence that Blending Works

We are so early into the evolution of blended learning that little formal research exists on how to construct
the most effective blended program designs. However, research from institutions such as Stanford
University and the University of Tennessee have given us valuable insight into some of the mechanisms
by which blended learning is better than both traditional methods and individual forms of e-learning
technology alone. This research gives us confidence that blending not only offers us the ability to be more
efficient in delivering learning, but more effective.

Stanford University has over 10 years of experience with self-paced enrichment programs for gifted youth.
Their problem was that only slightly more than half of their highly motivated students would complete
the programs. They diagnosed the problem as a mismatch between the student’s desired learning style—
interactive, social, mentored learning—with the delivery technology. Their introduction of live e-learning
into their program raised the completion rate up to 94% by addressing these needs. The improvement
was attributed to the ability of a scheduled live event to motivate learners to complete self-paced
materials on time; the availability of interaction with instructors and peers; and higher quality mentoring
experiences. The Stanford research strongly suggests that linking self-paced material to live e-learning
delivery could have a profound effect on overall usage and completion rates—enabling organizations to
radically increase the return from their existing investments in self-paced content.

Research by the University of Tennessee’s Physician’s Executive MBA (PEMBA) program* for mid-career
doctors has demonstrated that blended learning programs can be completed in approximately one-half
the time, at less than half the cost, using a rich mix of live e-learning, self-paced instruction, and physical
classroom delivery. Of even greater interest, this well-designed program was also able to demonstrate an
overall 10% better learning outcome than the traditional classroom learning format—the first formal
study to show significant improvements from elearning rather than just equivalent outcomes. This
exceptional outcome was attributed by PEMBA to the richness of the blended experience that included
multiple forms of physical and virtual live e-learning, combined with the ability of the students to test
their learning in the work context immediately and to collaborate with peers in adaptation to their unique
environments.

Introduction to Khan’s Octagonal Framework

A variety of factors are required to be addressed to create a meaningful learning environment. Many of
these factors are interrelated and interdependent. A systemic understanding of these factors can enable
designers to create meaningful distributed learning environments. These factors comprise the Octagonal
Framework. The framework has eight dimensions: institutional, pedagogical, technological, interface
design, evaluation, management, resource support, and ethical (see Figure 1). Each dimension in the
framework represents a category of issues that need to be addressed. These issues help organize thinking,
and ensure that the resulting learning program creates a meaningful learning experience.

Institutional

The Institutional dimension addresses issues concerning organizational, administrative, academic affairs,
and student services. Personnel involved in the planning of a learning program could ask questions related
to the preparedness of the organization, availability of content and infrastructure, and learners’ needs.
Can the organization manage offering each trainee the learning delivery mode independently as well as
in a blended program? Has the needs analysis been performed in order to understand all learners’ needs?

Pedagogical

The Pedagogical dimension is concerned with the combination of content that has to be delivered
(content analysis), the learner needs (audience analysis), and learning objectives (goal analysis). The
pedagogical dimension also encompasses the design and strategy aspect of e-learning. This dimension
addresses a scenario where all learning goals in a given program are listed and then the most appropriate
delivery method is chosen. For example, if a learner is expected to demonstrate a product (in sales
training), then using product simulation as part of the blend is appropriate. If a learner is expected to
come up with a new price model for a product, then using a discussion as one of the elements in the blend
would be an appropriate choice.

Technological

Once we have identified the delivery methods that are going to be a part of the blend, the Technology
issues need to be addressed. Issues include creating a learning environment and the tools to deliver the
learning program. This dimension addresses the need for the most suitable learning management system
(LMS) that would manage multiple delivery types and a learning content management system (LCMS) that
catalogs the actual content (online content modules) for the learning program. Technical requirements,
such as the server that supports the learning program, access to the server, bandwidth and accessibility,
security, and other hardware, software, and infrastructure issues are addressed.

Interface Design

The Interface Design dimension addresses factors related to the user interface of each element in the
blended learning program. One needs to ensure that the user interface supports all the elements of the
blend. The interface has to be sophisticated enough to integrate the different elements of the blend. This
will enable the learner to use each delivery type and switch between the different types. The usability of
the user interface will need to be analyzed. Issues like content structure, navigation, graphics, and help
also can be addressed in this dimension. For example, in a higher education course, students may study
online and then attend a lecture with the professor. The blended learning course should allow students
to assimilate both the online learning and the lecture equally well.

Evaluation

The Evaluation dimension is concerned with the usability of a blended learning program. The program
should have the capability to evaluate how effective a learning program has been as well as evaluating
the performance of each learner. In a blended learning program, the appropriate evaluation method
should be used for each delivery type.

Management

The Management dimension deals with issues related to the management of a blended learning program,
such as infrastructure and logistics to manage multiple delivery types. Delivering a blended learning
program is more work than delivering the entire course in one delivery type. The management dimension
also addresses issues like registration and notification, and scheduling of the different elements of the
blend.

Resource Support

The Resource Support dimension deals with making different types of resources (offline and online)
available for learners as well as organizing them. Resource support could also be a counselor/tutor always
available in person, via e-mail, or on a chat system.

Ethical

The Ethical dimension identifies the ethical issues that need to be addressed when developing a blended
learning program. Issues such as equal opportunity, cultural diversity, and nationality should be
addressed.

Conclusion

While learning technologies and delivery media continue to evolve and progress, one thing is certain:
Organizations (corporate, government, and academic) favor blended learning models over single delivery
mode programs.