Hybrid Course Model and Student Interactions: Educational Leadership and the Role of the Instructors

As higher education institutions convert their schedules to support additional hybrid courses, these often come at the expense of a reduced number of traditional courses. At some institutions, it may be necessary for students to take one or more hybrid courses to complete their degrees. Higher education leaders have the incumbent responsibility to ensure the hybrid course model provides the same or higher level of student interactions as can be found in traditional courses that use interactive pedagogies. As hybrid courses continue to become more of a standard delivery method in higher education, it is imperative that leaders (faculty and administrators) recognize that these courses are different as compared to traditional face-to-face lectures and fully-online courses. Hybrid courses bring both opportunities and challenges. The perceived safety net of the face-to-face session in hybrid courses may reduce the attention that administration and faculty attribute to this form of delivery.

[1]  A. Sher Assessing the Relationship of Student-Instructor and Student-Student Interaction to Student Learning and Satisfaction in Web-Based Online Learning Environment , 2009 .

[2]  Corrine Glesne,et al.  Becoming Qualitative Researchers: An Introduction , 1991 .

[3]  Jeanne Ellis Ormrod,et al.  Child Development and Education , 2001 .

[4]  Marianne E. Jones,et al.  Developing Your Portfolio – Enhancing Your Learning and Showing Your Stuff: A Guide for the Early Childhood Student or Professional , 2005 .

[5]  A. Chickering,et al.  Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education , 1987, CORE.

[6]  Constance A. Rothmund Correlation between course interactivity and reported levels of student satisfaction in hybrid courses , 2008 .

[7]  Scott D. Johnson,et al.  Comparative analysis of learner satisfaction and learning outcomes in online and face-to-face learning environments , 2000 .

[8]  Kerstin E. E. Schroder,et al.  Interaction, Internet self-efficacy, and self-regulated learning as predictors of student satisfaction in online education courses , 2014, Internet High. Educ..

[9]  D. Randy Garrison,et al.  Blended Learning in Higher Education: Framework, Priciples and Guidlines , 2007 .

[10]  C. N. Marti,et al.  EXPLORING RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN STUDENT ENGAGEMENT AND STUDENT OUTCOMES IN COMMUNITY COLLEGES: REPORT ON VALIDATION RESEARCH , 2006 .

[11]  Jean Anyon Theory and Educational Research : Toward Critical Social Explanation , 2009 .

[12]  Marise Ph. Born,et al.  Learning Environment, Interaction, Sense of Belonging and Study Success in Ethnically Diverse Student Groups , 2010 .

[13]  Sandra M. Mancuso A qualitative study of barriers to participation in Web-based environments among learners at the community college level , 2008 .

[14]  L. Vygotsky Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes: Harvard University Press , 1978 .

[15]  Thomas M. Duffy,et al.  Learner-centered theory and practice in distance education : cases from higher education , 2003 .

[16]  David H. Jonassen,et al.  Constructivism and the Technology of Instruction : A Conversation , 2013 .

[17]  S. Engel,et al.  Thought and Language , 1964, Dialogue.

[18]  J. Young "Hybrid" Teaching Seeks To End the Divide between Traditional and Online Instruction. , 2002 .

[19]  B. Funke,et al.  University Faculty and Student Perceptions of Web-Based Instruction , 1998 .

[20]  Yiasemina Karagiorgi,et al.  Translating Constructivism into Instructional Design: Potential and Limitations , 2005, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[21]  John W. Creswell,et al.  Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches , 2010 .