The previous examples may have already made it clear that there are different ways to design a blended course. Various scenarios or models for blended learning are also described in the literature¹. Here, we distinguish 8 basic models that are interesting for higher education.

Below, you are introduced to these 8 models. In each case, they are linked to a concrete example. The example always starts from the same course, which is designed differently depending on the scenario. The course is "Evidence-based working", a course from the bachelor of occupational therapy. In "Evidence-based Working" students learn research skills. Amongst other things, students should know and be able to understand statistics and also apply it themselves in concrete exercises.

Attention! Not every scenario works equally well here. The choice also depends on the type of course, the amount of campus time you get and the starting situation of your students.

Face to face driver model

The face-to-face driver model assumes physical education on campus by default. Online learning moments are integrated during the physical classes and are fully dedicated to differentiation. For example, digital learning materials can be provided to offer extra challenges for cognitively strong students or to offer remediation for cognitively weaker students. It can also be used to create smaller groups for which the teacher provides direct guidance. When most of the students work online, a smaller part of the group can be guided directly by the teacher. After a predetermined time, the groups then switch. Because the teacher stays close, this model of blended learning can be used for students who have limited self-regulatory skills. The teacher can strongly structure and intensively guide the learning process.

Example for "Evidence-based Working":

In this scenario, the teacher could choose to translate difficult topics, e.g. analytical statistics into online learning paths in which knowledge clips are interspersed with exercises with automatic feedback. Or the teacher could choose to make some challenging exercises available online for the stronger students. The difference with the A la carte model (below) is that the students go through these online learning paths or exercises DURING campus time. This gives the teacher room to differentiate. For example, when some of the students complete extra challenging exercises online, the teacher has time to give extra guidance and explanation to the students who are still struggling with the subject.

A la carte model

Within the à la carte model, physical education is the standard. Physical classes are augmented with some online learning activities and course elements, which students can work through independently at home (or elsewhere) to reinforce campus learning. During online activities, for example, difficult topics or exercises are addressed, providing targeted repetition opportunities for students. These online learning opportunities are optional and usually asynchronous. There is no reduction in the amount of campus time. Online materials are thoughtfully offered as an additional learning or practice opportunity, on top of the standard physical instruction. This model strongly assumes campus learning under the guidance of the lecturer. As a result, this model can be used for students with basic digital skills and/or with limited self-regulation skills.

Online components can serve various purposes, some examples:

Strengthen student interaction: online discussions to deepen class discussions and interactions.
Increasing the efficiency of class time: online components that explain the basics again, allowing more time for practice and application, as students can brush up on the basics outside class time.
Enabling customised remediation: online components that enable students to review difficult topics at their own pace.

Example for "Evidence-based Working":

In this scenario, the teacher could choose to translate difficult topics e.g. analytical statistics into a remedial online module in which extra exercises are offered with automated feedback. With this remedial module, the teacher can anticipate on questions. In addition, the teacher could also translate the necessary prior knowledge on Excel into a digital learning path in which exercises are interspersed with knowledge clips. These online elements are not part of the campus lessons but are additionally offered to help/support students in achieving the objectives. Both online learning paths are optional and for extra support of the students. Students who do not need them do not have to take them.

Emporium model

The Emporium model is based on the concept of “project-based learning”. All traditional teaching is replaced by asynchronous online learning paths that students work through independently. Through the online learning paths, students acquire the domain-specific knowledge and skills needed to solve the problem presented. As students often engage with online learning content on an independent basis, sufficient digital and self-regulation skills are expected. In this model, campus time is organised in large blocks (e.g. half a day) during which the students work together on a specific project. In this process, the teacher is constantly present to help students getting started with their problem solving and guide them.

A particular form of the emporium model is the Open Learning Centre. In this model, a classroom is not limited to one subject. Several projects from different subjects can intermingle as students work mainly self-paced and in groups. Teachers of the different projects are then present in the classroom or within walking distance.

This model is especially suitable for students who already have prior knowledge of the domain. Research shows that project-based learning for students without prior knowledge does not lead to increased learning.

Example for "Evidence-based Working":

Translating this course into an emporium model is only possible if students already have prior knowledge of statistics or research methods. In this scenario, the teacher could choose to focus on four challenges/problems, research problems that students have to solve and for which they have to acquire new knowledge about descriptive and analytical statistics and their application in Excel. Online, the underlying knowledge and skills are translated into online modules that students can quickly find according to their problem/challenge. During the lessons, students are given the space to tackle these problems, guided by the teacher.

3 Location model

This model explicitly considers three locations where students learn: on campus, online and in the workplace. The acquisition of new knowledge and skills is primarily through online learning moments from home (or elsewhere), which can be either asynchronous or synchronous. Physical learning moments on campus are organized only to a limited extent and center on applying and deepening the acquired insights through interactive exercises. Workplace learning is related to what the student acquires online and practices on campus. In principle, learning in the workplace is purely physical. Since students engage in learning content independently during online learning activities, a certain level of digital and self-regulation skills is expected from students.

In this scenario, the teacher could choose to provide online the necessary knowledge to interpret research and analyse data. On campus, some practice moments could be scheduled, where students work on fictional cases and reflect on research in media articles. Intervision moments could also be organised on campus. Next, each student can go to a specific company to work on concrete data and research questions. They are guided in this by a mentor in the workplace. They can also refer back to the online information when necessary and/or ask questions to their teacher and fellow students during intervision moments on campus.

Replacement model

In the replacement model, some of the physical learning time on campus is replaced by online learning opportunities in which students participate from home (or elsewhere). Through online learning, students acquire knowledge independently. This can be done through both asynchronous and synchronous learning activities that can be completed individually, in small groups or with the whole group of students. Physical learning time is reduced and the focus is on deepening and applying the learning content and interaction amongst students. The teacher acts as a coach in this process. As students in this model acquire and process learning content independently in the online learning time, they are expected to have sufficient self-regulation and digital skills.

Example for "Evidence-based Working":

In this scenario, there is less campus time but more online work time. The teacher could allocate the online time to teaching the necessary knowledge as well as practising this knowledge through concrete exercises. A mix of live online sessions, knowledge clips and self-assessment assignments can trigger students' online learning. Campus time can further build on this online time by, for example, working with entrance and exit tickets (where previous knowledge is concretely questioned in exercises) and a clear structure. In this scenario, the teacher can also choose to focus campus time exclusively on the more difficult topics and integrative exercises.

Flex model

The flex model takes online learning by default. Students acquire new knowledge and skills through online instruction and completion of online learning activities. Online learning time can be synchronous or asynchronous. Physical learning time is very limited and organized as subject-specific tutoring or remediation by the lecturer of individual students or smaller subgroups of students. These students can be identified by the lecturer after analyzing the learning data regarding their online activities. Students who do not need the campus sessions do not have to take them. In that way flex model can be seen as the opposite of à la carte model. Since the flex-model focuses on independent knowledge
acquisition during online learning moments, strong self-regulation and digital skills are expected from students. The lecturer should also be digitally proficient, as their analysis of online learning data determines the design of the learning time on campus.

Example for "Evidence-based Working":

In this scenario, the teacher should make the exercises and knowledge clips as interactive as possible, thus generating data on the extent to which students have mastered the material and the extent to which they keep up with the path of online learning. Besides these interactive -data-generating- activities, it remains important to facilitate online live sessions. It gives students opportunities to ask questions and it also allows the teacher to keep track of the need for remedial sessions on campus. This online data is indispensable for shaping the guidance sessions on campus and for inviting specific students (groups) to attend.

Hyflex model

Within the hyflex model, students can choose to achieve their learning goals through online learning pathways or through campus classes, or a mix of both. The hyflex model thus allows flexibility in the pace, time, place and format of learning. This model is only possible when two simultaneous tracks are organised: an online and a campus track. Both can be followed independently, but students should also be able to switch from one track to the other (and back again) whenever they wish. A good structure is therefore essential. Students can choose on a weekly basis whether to follow the on-campus or the online pathway. As the student can choose whether to learn online or on campus, this implies a correct assessment of their own digital skills as well as their ability to self-regulate their online learning.

Example for "Evidence-based Working":

Here, the teacher should organize 2 simultaneous versions of the course. One in which the students can follow everything online, and one in which the students get to work primarily on campus. The teacher should think carefully about the structure beforehand and keep a tight time schedule. Only then can a student who takes the online track, for example, but still wishes to take some classes on campus, transition smoothly. Through data analysis in the online learning environment or monitoring of the students in class, the teacher can also give advice to switch from one track to another at a certain point.

Online driver model

In the online driver model, instruction is provided almost exclusively through an online learning pathway that students can follow independently from home (or elsewhere). They acquire, process and practice knowledge and/or skills through digital learning platforms. This can be done both asynchronous and synchronous. Assessment can take place either online or on campus. As learning and teaching takes place online, it requires advanced digital skills from both lecturers and students and strong selfregulation skills from students.

Example for "Evidence-based Working":

In this scenario, the teacher might choose to organise the course unit entirely online. As with the flex model, it is then very important for the teacher to give sufficient thought to how he can continue to monitor his students. For example, by making exercises and knowledge clips as interactive as possible and by organising online contact moments, e.g. in the form of coaching moments. Remedial group sessions on campus are not possible here, but can be organised online if necessary.

WHICH BLENDED MODEL(S) IS/ARE SUITABLE FOR A SAP?

Take the excercise.

¹ References

Beatty, B. J. (2019) Hybrid flexible course design: Implementing student-directed hybrid classes. EdTechBooks. Retrieved Decembre 2021 from https://edtechbooks.org/hyflex
Corbett, K. (n.d.). Blended learning - 4 models. Retrieved Decembre 2021 from https://kevincorbett.com/blended-learning-4-models/
Graham, C.R., & Allen, S. (2009). Designing blended learning environments. In P. L. Rogers, G.A. Berg, J.V. Boettecher, C.Howard, L. Justice, & K. Schenk (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Distance Learning (Vol. 2, pp. 562-570). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Hustinx, W., Cloosen, E., & Croes, H. (2017) Beleidsmodel voor de implementatie van blended learning. Onderwijsinnovatie , 31- 33
Pesavento, T., Shorter, C., Klein, J., Macasaet, D., & Wagstaff, S (2012). Teaching with technology. Winscon: L&S learning support services. Retreived Novembre 2021 from https://wisc.pb.unizin.org/teachingwithtech/chapter/blended-learning-models-examples/
Rubens, W. (2016). Elf modellen voor blended learning. Retrieved Decembre 2021 from https://www.te-learning.nl/blog/elf-modellen-voor-blended-learning/
Thompson, J. (2016). 6 blended learning models: When blended learning is what's up for succesful students. Retrieved Decembre 2021 from https://elearningindustry.com/6-blended-learning-models-blended-learning-successful-students
Twigg, C.A. (2003). Improving learning and reducing costs: New models for online learning. Educause Review, 38(5), 28, 30, 32-36, 38.