The cone of learning: a tertiary level empirical study across traditional, blended, and flexible learning modes

Tertiary institutions are moving towards more flexible teaching and learning environments. Relationships between tertiary teaching and learning modes, student outcomes, and learning perceptions have engaged partial studies. This article employs a holistic view. It develops and tests a tertiary teaching and learning environment from a value enhancement approach. Here student-preferred teaching and learning modes are assessed. The tertiary institution teaching and learning offerings or modes are mapped against student learning outcomes, as defined by the tertiary institution ‘business enhancement measurement model’. This research shows tertiary institutions can more closely align their educational teaching and learning solutions towards their student’s perceived learning requirements, whilst also enhancing its student’s skills.

[1]  Ram B. Misra,et al.  An Evaluation of Factors Regarding Students’ Assessment of Faculty in a Business School* , 2008 .

[2]  Shuk Ying Ho,et al.  Understanding the Impact of Web Personalization on User Information Processing and Decision Outcomes , 2006, MIS Q..

[3]  J. Hair.  Multivariate data analysis : a global perspective , 2010 .

[4]  Katerina Georgouli,et al.  A Framework for Adopting LMS to Introduce e-Learning in a Traditional Course , 2008, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[5]  John A. Hamilton.  Building and managing modern e-services , 2007 .

[6]  Richard E. Boyatzis,et al.  From learning styles to learning skills: the executive skills profile , 1995 .

[7]  Dan,et al.  Student Hits in an Internet-Supported Course: How Can Instructors Use Them and What Do They Mean?. , 2003 .

[8]  Saroja Selvanathan,et al.  Learning Experience and Learning Effectiveness in Undergraduate Statistics: Modeling Performance in Traditional and Flexible Learning Environments , 2005 .

[9]  Estelle Michinov,et al.  Face-to-face contact at the midpoint of an online collaboration: Its impact on the patterns of participation, interaction, affect, and behavior over time , 2008, Comput. Educ..

[10]  Michael Prosser,et al.  Improving the quality of student learning: the influence of learning context and student approaches to learning on learning outcomes , 1991 .

[11]  Judith E. Miller,et al.  Are four heads better than one? A comparison of cooperative and traditional teaching formats in an introductory biology course , 1997 .

[12]  John A. Hamilton,et al.  Building an international student market: educational-balanced scorecard solutions for regional Australian cities , 2004 .

[13]  G. Boulton‐Lewis.  Teaching for quality learning at university , 2008 .

[14]  M. Cully.  Working in harmony: The links between the labour market and the education and training market in Australia , 2008 .

[15]  P. B. Petersen.  The New Economics for Industry, Government, Education , 1993 .

[16]  Betty Collis,et al.  Flexible Learning in a Digital World , 2002 .

[17]  J. McCarthy,et al.  Active Learning Techniques Versus Traditional Teaching Styles: Two Experiments from History and Political Science , 1999 .

[18]  Sumit Sarkar,et al.  The Role of the Management Sciences in Research on Personalization , 2003, Manag. Sci..

[19]  B. J. Pine,et al.  Making mass customization work , 1993 .

[20]  Eyal Gamliel,et al.  Online versus traditional teaching evaluation: mode can matter , 2005 .

[21]  A. R. Crathorne,et al.  Economic Control of Quality of Manufactured Product. , 1933 .

[22]  Janette R. Hill,et al.  Flexible Learning Environments: Leveraging the Affordances of Flexible Delivery and Flexible Learning , 2006 .

[23]  Kate Beattie,et al.  Flexible coursework delivery to Australian postgraduates: How effective is the teaching and learning? , 1997 .

[24]  Barbara Flood,et al.  An exploration of the learning approaches of prospective professional accountants in Ireland , 2008 .

[25]  Clyde W. Holsapple,et al.  Defining, Assessing, and Promoting E‐Learning Success: An Information Systems Perspective* , 2006 .

[26]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Learning Together and Alone , 1999 .

[27]  Curtis J. Bonk,et al.  The Handbook of Blended Learning: Global Perspectives, Local Designs , 2005 .

[28]  Dowming Yeh,et al.  What drives a successful e-Learning? An empirical investigation of the critical factors influencing learner satisfaction , 2008, Comput. Educ..

[29]  John A. Hamilton.  The services gateway framework: innovations for the customer interface , 2008 .

[30]  John A. Hamilton.  A customer centric approach to front-end-business intelligence deployment , 2009 .

[31]  Byron J. Finch.  Operations Now: Supply Chain Profitability and Performance , 2007 .

[32]  Antony Stella,et al.  Benchmarking in Australian higher education: a thematic analysis of AUQA audit reports , 2007 .

[33]  Carl F. Mela,et al.  E-Customization , 2003 .

[34]  Sriram Thirumalai,et al.  Customer satisfaction with order fulfillment in retail supply chains: implications of product type in electronic B2C transactions , 2005 .

[35]  R. Dunlea.  National Centre for Vocational Education Research (NCVER) , 2005 .

[36]  Andrew J. Martin,et al.  Graduate Satisfaction with University and Perceived Employment Preparation , 2000 .

[37]  W. Deming.  The New Economics for Industry, Government, Education - 2nd Edition , 2000 .

[38]  Errol Yudko,et al.  Attitudes, beliefs, and attendance in a hybrid course , 2008, Comput. Educ..

[39]  Linda S. Brew.  The role of student feedback in evaluating and revising a blended learning course , 2008, Internet High. Educ..

[40]  S. Barrie.  Understanding What We Mean by the Generic Attributes of Graduates , 2006 .

[41]  S. Barrie,et al.  A conceptual framework for the teaching and learning of generic graduate attributes , 2007 .

[42]  John A. Hamilton,et al.  Enabling real estate service chain management through personalised Web interfacing using QFD , 2004 .

[43]  Kay Bryant,et al.  Impact of Web-Based Flexible Learning on Academic Performance in Information Systems , 2003, J. Inf. Syst. Educ..

[44]  D. Dill,et al.  Academic quality, league tables, and public policy: A cross-national analysis of university ranking systems , 2005 .