In this section, practical considerations for getting started with blended learning are provided through:

• A step-by-step approach
• An overview of some contextual challenges South African higher education practitioners are faced with concerning the implementation of blended learning

Getting started with blended learning can be a daunting task. The challenge does not lie in finding useful information on the web about blended learning, quite the opposite! A quick Google search with the search terms ‘Blended Learning’ will yield tens of thousands of results. The challenge lies in scrutinising available literature and practical advice that can be found online and making it applicable to your context. For this reason, the information provided in this section are aimed at lecturers who are inexperienced in blended learning as it provides a summary of what you need to consider when getting started with blended learning. It includes practical steps to take and it highlights some of the contextual challenges that need to be considered in the South African higher education context.

The benefits of blended learning are well documented but the pitfalls associated with poor planning for and execution of blended learning are equally widely cited. Blended learning provides opportunities to enhance the following good teaching practices:

• Improved student-lecturer interaction: frequent contact between students and lecturers is a key factor of good teaching practice. Student-lecturer interaction implies two-way communication and is different from a lecturer providing feedback to students or communicating information about the module (although both of these are also important in learning and teaching). Technology provides additional opportunities for student-lecturer interaction outside of the classroom.
• Improved peer interaction: working with others often increases involvement in learning, while sharing ideas and responding to others can deepen understanding. Although it may be easier to incorporate group work in a face-to-face environment (whether this happens in class or outside of the classroom), technology provides more flexibility for working with others with the added benefit of asynchronous interactions.
• Reflective learning: reflection is essential for deep learning. Online activities outside of the classroom can be designed to provide students with more frequent opportunities for reflection throughout the course.

The above-mentioned practices are all indicators of student engagement. Several studies have investigated the effect of student engagement on student success (see Bibliography).

Student-lecturer interaction and peer interaction were two of the challenges particularly highlighted in the large-scale move to blended learning that many South African universities attempted at the end of 2016 during the #FeesMustFall protests. In addition to this UFS staff and students identified the following challenges specifically, although it is believed that these challenges may resonate with lecturers in other South African universities:

• Large classes: increased student numbers at the UFS over the past two decades has led to numerous modules with large student numbers. There are several challenges associated with large class teaching, some of which can be addressed with technology. However, not all educational technology tools can be used effectively in large classes. The challenge lies in identifying both the tools and methods that work well in large classes.
• Technology access: Although most students have smartphones and many have access to a personal computer, possibly the biggest technology challenge that students are faced with in South Africa, is the prohibitive cost of data. Consequently, only a small percentage (21%) of UFS students have access to reliable internet off-campus. It is important for lecturers to know that their students will likely need to make use of the Wi-Fi on campus for online activities when they plan the online components of their course.
• Supporting students: it is a common misconception that all students are comfortable with technology. Many UFS students come from impoverished backgrounds and have never been exposed to computers before they entered university. A critical success factor of blended learning is student support. Implementing any type of technology or online activities will require support to students in ensuring that they are made familiar with both the software and procedures to complete online activities.
• Time: while the use of technology in learning and teaching can save time in the long term, it requires a significant initial time investment. Lecturers planning to incorporate more technology and or online activities in their modules need to be aware of the time investment required.

Alammary, Sheard, and Carbone (2014) suggest three major design approaches for blended learning based on the changes to the existing teaching methods and student learning experiences. These approaches are summarised below:

Low-impact blend: adding extra activities

What it is
Extra online activities are added to a traditional face-to-face module without eliminating any of the existing activities.

Benefits

• Minimal experience in teaching a traditional course is required for this approach.
• It is a quick and easy way to integrate online activities without reviewing the entire module.
• There is a low risk of failure when applied carefully.

Challenges

• Lecturers need to have some skills in the use of instructional technology.
• This approach has a high risk of producing a ‘course-and-a-half’, which is a common pitfall of blended learning where the student workload increases with the added online activities, without reducing contact-based activities. It is important to note that the notional hours of a module is determined by how long it will take the average full-time student to gain the necessary skills and knowledge required to successfully complete the module. Below average students may need to already be spending more time on the module than the estimated notional hours. One therefore needs to be careful not to add too much to the existing workload with a low-impact blend.
• Students may respond negatively to the added online activities if these activities do not meaningfully add to their overall experience in the module.

Medium-impact blend: replacing activities

What it is
Replacing some existing face-to-face activities with online activities.

Benefits

• The approach can be implemented incrementally, allowing lecturers to redesign their module gradually.
• Experience gained with this approach helps lecturers to build their confidence in blended learning.
• Allows for low-risk experimentation with educational technology and different teaching approaches without losing the benefits of the traditional module.

Challenges

• Lecturers need to have good technological knowledge of the tools they use and some confidence to implement this approach.
• The replacement and integration of activities require a dedicated time-investment.
• Long-term planning and evaluation of the module are necessary as this is a gradual process of introducing new resources and techniques.
• Some experience in teaching the traditional course is useful to identify parts of the course that do not work properly and that can potentially be replaced by online techniques.

High-impact blend: building from scratch

What it is
A total redesign of a module that requires a lecturer to consider each learning outcome and determine the best delivery option. This is consistent with the constructive alignment model of curriculum development (Biggs, 1996) as well as the backward design model (Stein & Graham, 2014).

Benefits

• Starting from a fresh perspective allows lecturers to reduce issues with the current module and design a more effective module as a whole.
• This approach allows for the most effective integration of online and face-to-face components.
• Lecturers have an opportunity to get the maximum benefits of blended learning and consider a wider variety of delivery options and teaching techniques.
• Rethinking the entire module allows for more thorough consideration of students’ needs.

Challenges

• A high level of technological knowledge and confidence are necessary for the successful implementation of this approach.
• Lecturers need to consider a wide variety of possible blended learning components and have a sound understanding of the implications of these.
• This approach requires some experience in both blended learning and traditional teaching.
• Redesigning the entire module is time-consuming and the implementation of the new module will require continuous monitoring and evaluation to refine.

Figure 2: Example of three different blended learning approaches (Adapted from Alammary et al., 2014, p.451).

Figure 2 is an illustrative example of how each of these three approaches can be applied to a traditional face-to-face module. In all three examples, the use of technology in the module is integrated with the face-to-face activities. Even in low-impact blends (that require the lowest level of technical expertise and experience), the activities added should still be integrated to create a cohesive face-to-face and online experience.

A Learning Management System (LMS) is a repository where information can be stored and student online activities can be tracked. It is also a useful environment to stimulate online collaboration between lecturers and students, as well as among students. Most South African universities make use of an institutional LMS. It is important that you are familiar with the different tools available on the LMS that your institution makes use of as well as the benefits of each of these tools so that you can make an informed decision on which tools would work best in your module.

In addition to the institutional LMS, you need to be aware of other educational technology tools available. There are many free tools available, whether you are able to use the tool effectively in your module should depend first and foremost on the pedagogy employed but will also be dependent on your university’s ICT policies.

A Learning Management System (LMS) is a repository where information can be stored and student online activities can be tracked. It is also a useful environment to stimulate online collaboration between lecturers and students, as well as among students. Most South African universities make use of an institutional LMS. It is important that you are familiar with the different tools available on the LMS that your institution makes use of as well as the benefits of each of these tools so that you can make an informed decision on which tools would work best in your module.

In addition to the institutional LMS, you need to be aware of other educational technology tools available. There are many free tools available, whether you are able to use the tool effectively in your module should depend first and foremost on the pedagogy employed but will also be dependent on your university’s ICT policies.

Alammary, A., Sheard, J., & Carbone, A. (2014). Blended learning in higher education: Three different design approaches. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 30(4).

Bates, A. W. (2015). Teaching in a Digital Age: Guidelines for designing teaching and learning. Retrieved from https://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/

Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Schmid, R. F., Tamim, R. M., & Abrami, P. C. (2014). A meta-analysis of blended learning and technology use in higher education: from the general to the applied. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 26(1), 87–122.

Downing, C. E., Spears, J., & Holtz, M. (2014). Transforming a Course to Blended Learning for Student Engagement. Education Research International, 2014, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/430732

Kinzie, J., & Kuh, G. (2017). Reframing Student Success in College: Advancing Know-What and Know-How. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 49(3), 19–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.2017.1321429

Kuh, G. D., Ikenberry, S., Jankowski, N., Cain, T. R., Ewell, P., Hutchings, P., & Kinzie, J. (2015). Using evidence of student learning to improve higher education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., & Baki, M. (2013). The effectiveness of online and blended learning: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Teachers College Record, 115(3), 1–47.

Meintjes, A. (2018). The Aftermath of #FeesMustFall: an Activity Theoretical Analysis of Blended Learning at the UFS. University of the Free State.

Strydom, F., Kuh, G., & Loots, S. (2017). Engaging students: using evidence to promote student success. Bloemfontein, South Africa: Sun Media.

Turner, P. M., & Carriveau, R. S. (2010). Next Generation Course Redesign. New York: Peter Lang.