teaching strategies in the new normal thesis

Five Contemporary Teaching Strategies in the New Normal

What is your teaching strategy in the new normal? For fellow educators, here are 5 teaching strategies in the new normal that I tried and worked. I include a sample instructional module for teachers’ reference.

Table of Contents

Teaching in the new normal brings with it challenges that appear almost insurmountable. Although school administrators intermittently issue memos to shift from all online school activities to face-to-face sessions, there are still apprehensions whenever symptoms or indications of COVID-19 infections appear. There is stigma associated with someone getting sick: has fever, with cough and colds, diarrhea, among others.

Nowadays could not be categorically declared a post-COVID-19 scenario given the various mutations of the coronavirus. The immunity imparted by vaccines against early virus strains is not a guaranteed immunity to oncoming virus strains.

Hence, while there may be successes attained by the government’s vaccination program, the population is not assured of absolute protection to keep themselves healthy and able to cope up with the severe, sometimes fatal, effects of COVID-19 infection.

Vaccine experts believe that booster shots are necessary to sustain virus immunity established by earlier vaccine doses. The efficacy of these added doses, however, is still subject to scrutiny. The side effects of extra doses may manifest in the near future or in the long-term.

It is this uncertainty, and the great risk imposed by the coronavirus, that the rational choice in these trying times is to keep on engaging in online teaching and learning. But are the teachers ready to face the challenges of teaching in the new normal?

Many teachers, particularly the non-technologically inclined, find the online learning mode too much for them. The situation is ironic, because teachers who need to stay at home because of comorbidity concerns are also the ones who are technologically challenged.

Teaching Strategies in the New Normal

1. prepare learning materials beforehand.

As early as 2009, I started writing online, primarily as a hobby. I know very little of how the web works. But then, with patience, I could create my website (amazingly, it’s still there!) using drag-and-drop technology offered by webnode, a Czech company. Thus, I have a free hand on what I would include on that website.

I integrated my teaching materials in my writing activity, thinking that the articles I wrote would be helpful to students in the future. It would then also be easier to link, as those materials are already online. Students can open those articles in the convenience of their homes.

This approach brought in dividends, because those instructional materials served as the basis for the instructional modules that I have created since COVID-19 forced everyone to adopt the virtual learning mode. It must be a matter of foresight and luck, because the disruptive nature of the internet would be the norm in the future. And it did as we gradually transition to the Education 4.0 learning approach spurred by the fourth industrial revolution, otherwise known as Industry 4.0 .

After more than a decade of online activity, I can say that I have learned more than enough to keep up with recent advancements in online learning. I came up with my Blended Website Learning Model , that I believe is the best way online learning can be delivered amid the struggle of poor internet connection in many parts of the world.

If you are a teacher or a mentor and have written nothing online, it will not be too late to do so. It would be easier to link to what you have already written as instructional material before if it’s online. And you can just update these instructional materials every school year or semester.

Your students will truly appreciate your work, which contains curated references, videos, and other great resources that facilitate learning online. Most likely, as a teacher, you will be in the best position to write something about your topic.

That’s my conclusion after seeing that many of the educational articles I posted online have been read by thousands of readers daily. Some of them come up to the top of keyword searches and ranked no. 1.

In fact, the article I wrote on conceptual framework garnered so many views and stayed at the top of the searches for several years. I wrote this article in 2015 because I could not find any relevant material about the topic which my students badly need. They always struggle on this part of the thesis writing process.

Now, I can see many other articles on the same topic that drew information from that article. Some even made it on the top of the searches using exactly the steps I outlined.

I don’t know if that would mean flattery or plain plagiarism of my original composition. Anyhow, that article was cited 153 times at this writing by researchers in Google Scholar . It had become an authority on the topic.

Also, integrating related articles I wrote since 2012 also helped me come up with books and e-books that helped finance this writing site and keep it online for almost a decade. Simplyeducate.me will turn 10 years in the next four days.

2. Create or use curated videos

You can find virtually almost all the instructional materials you need on YouTube . YouTube is a video sharing service where any teacher can upload his or her instructional materials just like anyone. It also has the potential to earn through the ads displayed along with the video. As a teacher struggling to make ends meet, plus the additional cost of being online, any potential earning will be most welcome.

If you have no time or find difficulty in creating your own instructional videos, you can curate existing videos. Find one that’s applicable to your teaching needs and link to it or embed the video if possible. You need to curate because the instructional videos may not satisfy your quality standards.

Here is a reference on how to embed a video in WordPress, a popular web development software: How to Embed Video in WordPress .

It takes time to create an educational YouTube video with captions. But that time is well spent, as it can be both educational and entertaining at the same time. I composed one for the first time (see video below).

3. Develop short instructional modules

Synchronous sessions or real-time online sessions with students need not take most of your teaching time, as other teachers mistakenly do. That will surely exhaust not only your students but yourself.

Short, direct to the point instructional modules, take care of the course content that your students need to understand their lessons. Having studied a course in Coursera , I appreciate the way the instructional modules are structured.

The whole course outline goes this way:

• Module Overview
• Learning Objectives
• Study Questions

The instructional video in that course is short; usually about five minutes at the most. But in the instructional modules I prepare for my class, I embed curated videos that can last 30 minutes. It all depends on your judgement as a teacher.

One thing to note, however, is to always update the links and the videos that you include in your instructional material every year or semester. Chances are, those links are obsolete or have been changed or updated by the creator.

That’s what I just did in the example instructional module that I include in this article for your reference and as a service to the teaching community where I belong. I describe the module and provide a link to the free PDF version of the instructional module below.

Sample Instructional Module on Biogeochemical Cycles The purpose of this module is to enable students to diagram the essential biogeochemical cycles and explain how the important elements of life, namely hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen, carbon, phosphorus, and sulfur, are cycled in the biosphere. The information provided in this module will enable the students to trace the different elements in various forms and how man can disrupt the natural processes of the biogeochemical cycles. J. P. A. Regoniel, PhD

Download PDF

4. Monitor student outputs using a matrix

It is good practice to monitor student performance and let them know you monitor their performance. This teaching strategy not only helps you assess the performance of the students but also encourages them to keep up with the lessons.

According to Dr. Shali Tarot, highlighting the accomplishments of other people is a really strong incentive. Thus, if some students accomplish the tasks they are supposed to do and keep with the deadlines, the others follow suit.

I use a matrix showing the submissions made by students, which everyone can see each time I meet them. I also show the matrix of accomplishments on the password protected website I created for my instructional materials.

You can just put a star, a thumbs up, or any encouraging symbol to mark a student’s accomplishment. I show an example matrix of the way I do it below.

Seeing the performance of others prompts them to do better or keep up with the expected outputs.

5. Always record and upload synchronous sessions

Although there are many reasons for students’ inability to attend a synchronous session, such as poor internet connectivity, work demand or personal issues, recording each session and making them available online wards off excuses. Creating a simple, fast loading website allows students to review the past discussions during their free time and helps them keep up with the lessons.

Recording synchronous sessions using the free services of Zoom or similar app is easy. You need not record a long discussion. A 30-minute session is ample time to explain the purpose of the next instructional module to accomplish. You can also give feedback on the submissions or check on the circumstances of the students.

The teaching strategies like the 5 enumerated here, namely 1) prepare instructional materials ahead of time, 2) create or use curated videos, 3) develop short instructional modules, 4) monitor students output using a matrix, and 5) always record and upload synchronous sessions arose out of the necessity of conducting classes online. Applying them can help ease your difficulty in teaching online and make the most of online tools to carry out your task as a teacher or mentor.

As a teacher in the new normal, you need to develop the following skills to apply the teaching strategies outlined in this article:

• Write articles online using free and easy to use writing platforms like WordPress or Webnode ,
• Create videos using your android phone, free windows video editor integrated with your PC or Mac video editing software Apple iMovie, among others ,
• Develop nice-looking instructional modules like mine using Lyx , an open-source document processor.

Remember, it is never late to learn something new.

Learning never exhausts the mind. Leonardo da Vinci

©2022 October 16 J. P. A. Regoniel

Related Posts

Academic writing skills: five tips to enhance your paper.

The Essentials of English As A Medium of Instruction (EMI) in Ph

Motivation and attitude in language learning, about the author, patrick regoniel.

Dr. Regoniel, a faculty member of the graduate school, served as consultant to various environmental research and development projects covering issues and concerns on climate change, coral reef resources and management, economic valuation of environmental and natural resources, mining, and waste management and pollution. He has extensive experience on applied statistics, systems modelling and analysis, an avid practitioner of LaTeX, and a multidisciplinary web developer. He leverages pioneering AI-powered content creation tools to produce unique and comprehensive articles in this website.

Advertisement

The “new normal” in education

• Viewpoints/ Controversies
• Published: 24 November 2020
• Volume 51 , pages 3–14, ( 2021 )

Cite this article

• José Augusto Pacheco   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-4623-6898 1  

344k Accesses

47 Citations

5 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Effects rippling from the Covid 19 emergency include changes in the personal, social, and economic spheres. Are there continuities as well? Based on a literature review (primarily of UNESCO and OECD publications and their critics), the following question is posed: How can one resist the slide into passive technologization and seize the possibility of achieving a responsive, ethical, humane, and international-transformational approach to education? Technologization, while an ongoing and evidently ever-intensifying tendency, is not without its critics, especially those associated with the humanistic tradition in education. This is more apparent now that curriculum is being conceived as a complicated conversation. In a complex and unequal world, the well-being of students requires diverse and even conflicting visions of the world, its problems, and the forms of knowledge we study to address them.

Similar content being viewed by others

Inclusion and equity in education: Making sense of global challenges

21st Century Skills

For Whom Is K-12 Education: A Critical Look into Twenty-First Century Educational Policy and Curriculum in the Philippines

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

From the past, we might find our way to a future unforeclosed by the present (Pinar 2019 , p. 12)

Texts regarding this pandemic’s consequences are appearing at an accelerating pace, with constant coverage by news outlets, as well as philosophical, historical, and sociological reflections by public intellectuals worldwide. Ripples from the current emergency have spread into the personal, social, and economic spheres. But are there continuities as well? Is the pandemic creating a “new normal” in education or simply accenting what has already become normal—an accelerating tendency toward technologization? This tendency presents an important challenge for education, requiring a critical vision of post-Covid-19 curriculum. One must pose an additional question: How can one resist the slide into passive technologization and seize the possibility of achieving a responsive, ethical, humane, and international-transformational approach to education?

The ongoing present

Unpredicted except through science fiction, movie scripts, and novels, the Covid-19 pandemic has changed everyday life, caused wide-scale illness and death, and provoked preventive measures like social distancing, confinement, and school closures. It has struck disproportionately at those who provide essential services and those unable to work remotely; in an already precarious marketplace, unemployment is having terrible consequences. The pandemic is now the chief sign of both globalization and deglobalization, as nations close borders and airports sit empty. There are no departures, no delays. Everything has changed, and no one was prepared. The pandemic has disrupted the flow of time and unraveled what was normal. It is the emergence of an event (think of Badiou 2009 ) that restarts time, creates radical ruptures and imbalances, and brings about a contingency that becomes a new necessity (Žižek 2020 ). Such events question the ongoing present.

The pandemic has reshuffled our needs, which are now based on a new order. Whether of short or medium duration, will it end in a return to the “normal” or move us into an unknown future? Žižek contends that “there is no return to normal, the new ‘normal’ will have to be constructed on the ruins of our old lives, or we will find ourselves in a new barbarism whose signs are already clearly discernible” (Žižek 2020 , p. 3).

Despite public health measures, Gil ( 2020 ) observes that the pandemic has so far generated no physical or spiritual upheaval and no universal awareness of the need to change how we live. Techno-capitalism continues to work, though perhaps not as before. Online sales increase and professionals work from home, thereby creating new digital subjectivities and economies. We will not escape the pull of self-preservation, self-regeneration, and the metamorphosis of capitalism, which will continue its permanent revolution (Wells 2020 ). In adapting subjectivities to the recent demands of digital capitalism, the pandemic can catapult us into an even more thoroughly digitalized space, a trend that artificial intelligence will accelerate. These new subjectivities will exhibit increased capacities for voluntary obedience and programmable functioning abilities, leading to a “new normal” benefiting those who are savvy in software-structured social relationships.

The Covid-19 pandemic has submerged us all in the tsunami-like economies of the Cloud. There is an intensification of the allegro rhythm of adaptation to the Internet of Things (Davies, Beauchamp, Davies, and Price 2019 ). For Latour ( 2020 ), the pandemic has become internalized as an ongoing state of emergency preparing us for the next crisis—climate change—for which we will see just how (un)prepared we are. Along with inequality, climate is one of the most pressing issues of our time (OECD 2019a , 2019b ) and therefore its representation in the curriculum is of public, not just private, interest.

Education both reflects what is now and anticipates what is next, recoding private and public responses to crises. Žižek ( 2020 , p. 117) suggests in this regard that “values and beliefs should not be simply ignored: they play an important role and should be treated as a specific mode of assemblage”. As such, education is (post)human and has its (over)determination by beliefs and values, themselves encoded in technology.

Will the pandemic detoxify our addiction to technology, or will it cement that addiction? Pinar ( 2019 , pp. 14–15) suggests that “this idea—that technological advance can overcome cultural, economic, educational crises—has faded into the background. It is our assumption. Our faith prompts the purchase of new technology and assures we can cure climate change”. While waiting for technology to rescue us, we might also remember to look at ourselves. In this way, the pandemic could be a starting point for a more sustainable environment. An intelligent response to climate change, reactivating the humanistic tradition in education, would reaffirm the right to such an education as a global common good (UNESCO 2015a , p. 10):

This approach emphasizes the inclusion of people who are often subject to discrimination – women and girls, indigenous people, persons with disabilities, migrants, the elderly and people living in countries affected by conflict. It requires an open and flexible approach to learning that is both lifelong and life-wide: an approach that provides the opportunity for all to realize their potential for a sustainable future and a life of dignity”.

Pinar ( 2004 , 2009 , 2019 ) concevies of curriculum as a complicated conversation. Central to that complicated conversation is climate change, which drives the need for education for sustainable development and the grooming of new global citizens with sustainable lifestyles and exemplary environmental custodianship (Marope 2017 ).

The new normal

The pandemic ushers in a “new” normal, in which digitization enforces ways of working and learning. It forces education further into technologization, a development already well underway, fueled by commercialism and the reigning market ideology. Daniel ( 2020 , p. 1) notes that “many institutions had plans to make greater use of technology in teaching, but the outbreak of Covid-19 has meant that changes intended to occur over months or years had to be implemented in a few days”.

Is this “new normal” really new or is it a reiteration of the old?

Digital technologies are the visible face of the immediate changes taking place in society—the commercial society—and schools. The immediate solution to the closure of schools is distance learning, with platforms proliferating and knowledge demoted to information to be exchanged (Koopman 2019 ), like a product, a phenomenon predicted decades ago by Lyotard ( 1984 , pp. 4-5):

Knowledge is and will be produced in order to be sold, it is and will be consumed in order to be valued in a new production: in both cases, the goal is exchange. Knowledge ceases to be an end in itself, it loses its use-value.

Digital technologies and economic rationality based on performance are significant determinants of the commercialization of learning. Moving from physical face-to-face presence to virtual contact (synchronous and asynchronous), the learning space becomes disembodied, virtual not actual, impacting both student learning and the organization of schools, which are no longer buildings but websites. Such change is not only coterminous with the pandemic, as the Education 2030 Agenda (UNESCO 2015b ) testified; preceding that was the Delors Report (Delors 1996 ), which recoded education as lifelong learning that included learning to know, learning to do, learning to be, and learning to live together.

Transnational organizations have specified competences for the 21st century and, in the process, have defined disciplinary and interdisciplinary knowledge that encourages global citizenship, through “the supra curriculum at the global, regional, or international comparative level” (Marope 2017 , p. 10). According to UNESCO ( 2017 ):

While the world may be increasingly interconnected, human rights violations, inequality and poverty still threaten peace and sustainability. Global Citizenship Education (GCED) is UNESCO’s response to these challenges. It works by empowering learners of all ages to understand that these are global, not local issues and to become active promoters of more peaceful, tolerant, inclusive, secure and sustainable societies.

These transnational initiatives have not only acknowledged traditional school subjects but have also shifted the curriculum toward timely topics dedicated to understanding the emergencies of the day (Spiller 2017 ). However, for the OECD ( 2019a ), the “new normal” accentuates two ideas: competence-based education, which includes the knowledges identified in the Delors Report , and a new learning framework structured by digital technologies. The Covid-19 pandemic does not change this logic. Indeed, the interdisciplinary skills framework, content and standardized testing associated with the Programme for International Student Assessment of the OECD has become the most powerful tool for prescribing the curriculum. Educationally, “the universal homogenous ‘state’ exists already. Globalization of standardized testing—the most prominent instance of threatening to restructure schools into technological sites of political socialization, conditioning children for compliance to a universal homogeneous state of mind” (Pinar 2019 , p. 2).

In addition to cognitive and practical skills, this “homogenous state of mind” rests on so-called social and emotional skills in the service of learning to live together, affirming global citizenship, and presumably returning agency to students and teachers (OECD 2019a ). According to Marope ( 2017 , p. 22), “this calls for higher flexibility in curriculum development, and for the need to leave space for curricula interpretation, contextualization, and creativity at the micro level of teachers and classrooms”. Heterogeneity is thus enlisted in the service of both economic homogeneity and disciplinary knowledge. Disciplinary knowledge is presented as universal and endowed with social, moral, and cognitive authority. Operational and effective knowledge becomes central, due to the influence of financial lobbies, thereby ensuring that the logic of the market is brought into the practices of schools. As Pestre ( 2013 , p. 21) observed, “the nature of this knowledge is new: what matters is that it makes hic et nunc the action, its effect and not its understanding”. Its functionality follows (presumably) data and evidence-based management.

A new language is thus imposed on education and the curriculum. Such enforced installation of performative language and Big Data lead to effective and profitable operations in a vast market concerned with competence in operational skills (Lyotard 1984 ). This “new normal” curriculum is said to be more horizontal and less hierarchical and radically polycentric with problem-solving produced through social networks, NGOs, transnational organizations, and think tanks (Pestre 2013 ; Williamson 2013 , 2017 ). Untouched by the pandemic, the “new (old) normal” remains based on disciplinary knowledge and enmeshed in the discourse of standards and accountability in education.

Such enforced commercialism reflects and reinforces economic globalization. Pinar ( 2011 , p. 30) worries that “the globalization of instrumental rationality in education threatens the very existence of education itself”. In his theory, commercialism and the technical instrumentality by which homogenization advances erase education as an embodied experience and the curriculum as a humanistic project. It is a time in which the humanities are devalued as well, as acknowledged by Pinar ( 2019 , p. 19): “In the United States [and in the world] not only does economics replace education—STEM replace the liberal arts as central to the curriculum—there are even politicians who attack the liberal arts as subversive and irrelevant…it can be more precisely characterized as reckless rhetoric of a know-nothing populism”. Replacing in-person dialogical encounters and the educational cultivation of the person (via Bildung and currere ), digital technologies are creating uniformity of learning spaces, in spite of their individualistic tendencies. Of course, education occurs outside schools—and on occasion in schools—but this causal displacement of the centrality of the school implies a devaluation of academic knowledge in the name of diversification of learning spaces.

In society, education, and specifically in the curriculum, the pandemic has brought nothing new but rather has accelerated already existing trends that can be summarized as technologization. Those who can work “remotely” exercise their privilege, since they can exploit an increasingly digital society. They themselves are changed in the process, as their own subjectivities are digitalized, thus predisposing them to a “curriculum of things” (a term coined by Laist ( 2016 ) to describe an object-oriented pedagogical approach), which is organized not around knowledge but information (Koopman 2019 ; Couldry and Mejias 2019 ). This (old) “new normal” was advanced by the OECD, among other international organizations, thus precipitating what some see as “a dynamic and transformative articulation of collective expectations of the purpose, quality, and relevance of education and learning to holistic, inclusive, just, peaceful, and sustainable development, and to the well-being and fulfilment of current and future generations” (Marope 2017 , p. 13). Covid-19, illiberal democracy, economic nationalism, and inaction on climate change, all upend this promise.

Understanding the psychological and cultural complexity of the curriculum is crucial. Without appreciating the infinity of responses students have to what they study, one cannot engage in the complicated conversation that is the curriculum. There must be an affirmation of “not only the individualism of a person’s experience but [of what is] underlining the significance of a person’s response to a course of study that has been designed to ignore individuality in order to buttress nation, religion, ethnicity, family, and gender” (Grumet 2017 , p. 77). Rather than promoting neuroscience as the answer to the problems of curriculum and pedagogy, it is long-past time for rethinking curriculum development and addressing the canonical curriculum question: What knowledge is of most worth from a humanistic perspective that is structured by complicated conversation (UNESCO 2015a ; Pinar 2004 , 2019 )? It promotes respect for diversity and rejection of all forms of (cultural) hegemony, stereotypes, and biases (Pacheco 2009 , 2017 ).

Revisiting the curriculum in the Covid-19 era then expresses the fallacy of the “new normal” but also represents a particular opportunity to promote a different path forward.

Looking to the post-Covid-19 curriculum

Based on the notion of curriculum as a complicated conversation, as proposed by Pinar ( 2004 ), the post-Covid-19 curriculum can seize the possibility of achieving a responsive, ethical, humane education, one which requires a humanistic and internationally aware reconceptualization of curriculum.

While beliefs and values are anchored in social and individual practices (Pinar 2019 , p. 15), education extracts them for critique and reconsideration. For example, freedom and tolerance are not neutral but normative practices, however ideology-free policymakers imagine them to be.

That same sleight-of-hand—value neutrality in the service of a certain normativity—is evident in a digital concept of society as a relationship between humans and non-humans (or posthumans), a relationship not only mediated by but encapsulated within technology: machines interfacing with other machines. This is not merely a technological change, as if it were a quarantined domain severed from society. Technologization is a totalizing digitalization of human experience that includes the structures of society. It is less social than economic, with social bonds now recoded as financial transactions sutured by software. Now that subjectivity is digitalized, the human face has become an exclusively economic one that fabricates the fantasy of rational and free agents—always self-interested—operating in supposedly free markets. Oddly enough, there is no place for a vision of humanistic and internationally aware change. The technological dimension of curriculum is assumed to be the primary area of change, which has been deeply and totally imposed by global standards. The worldwide pandemic supports arguments for imposing forms of control (Žižek 2020 ), including the geolocation of infected people and the suspension—in a state of exception—of civil liberties.

By destroying democracy, the technology of control leads to totalitarianism and barbarism, ending tolerance, difference, and diversity. Remembrance and memory are needed so that historical fascisms (Eley 2020 ) are not repeated, albeit in new disguises (Adorno 2011 ). Technologized education enhances efficiency and ensures uniformity, while presuming objectivity to the detriment of human reflection and singularity. It imposes the running data of the Curriculum of Things and eschews intellectual endeavor, critical attitude, and self-reflexivity.

For those who advocate the primacy of technology and the so-called “free market”, the pandemic represents opportunities not only for profit but also for confirmation of the pervasiveness of human error and proof of the efficiency of the non-human, i.e., the inhuman technology. What may possibly protect children from this inhumanity and their commodification, as human capital, is a humane or humanistic education that contradicts their commodification.

The decontextualized technical vocabulary in use in a market society produces an undifferentiated image in which people are blinded to nuance, distinction, and subtlety. For Pestre, concepts associated with efficiency convey the primacy of economic activity to the exclusion, for instance, of ethics, since those concepts devalue historic (if unrealized) commitments to equality and fraternity by instead emphasizing economic freedom and the autonomy of self-interested individuals. Constructing education as solely economic and technological constitutes a movement toward total efficiency through the installation of uniformity of behavior, devaluing diversity and human creativity.

Erased from the screen is any image of public education as a space of freedom, or as Macdonald ( 1995 , p. 38) holds, any image or concept of “the dignity and integrity of each human”. Instead, what we face is the post-human and the undisputed reign of instrumental reality, where the ends justify the means and human realization is reduced to the consumption of goods and experiences. As Pinar ( 2019 , p. 7) observes: “In the private sphere…. freedom is recast as a choice of consumer goods; in the public sphere, it converts to control and the demand that freedom flourish, so that whatever is profitable can be pursued”. Such “negative” freedom—freedom from constraint—ignores “positive” freedom, which requires us to contemplate—in ethical and spiritual terms—what that freedom is for. To contemplate what freedom is for requires “critical and comprehensive knowledge” (Pestre 2013 , p. 39) not only instrumental and technical knowledge. The humanities and the arts would reoccupy the center of such a curriculum and not be related to its margins (Westbury 2008 ), acknowledging that what is studied within schools is a complicated conversation among those present—including oneself, one’s ancestors, and those yet to be born (Pinar 2004 ).

In an era of unconstrained technologization, the challenge facing the curriculum is coding and STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics), with technology dislodging those subjects related to the human. This is not a classical curriculum (although it could be) but one focused on the emergencies of the moment–namely, climate change, the pandemic, mass migration, right-wing populism, and economic inequality. These timely topics, which in secondary school could be taught as short courses and at the elementary level as thematic units, would be informed by the traditional school subjects (yes, including STEM). Such a reorganization of the curriculum would allow students to see how academic knowledge enables them to understand what is happening to them and their parents in their own regions and globally. Such a cosmopolitan curriculum would prepare children to become citizens not only of their own nations but of the world. This citizenship would simultaneously be subjective and social, singular and universal (Marope 2020 ). Pinar ( 2019 , p. 5) reminds us that “the division between private and public was first blurred then erased by technology”:

No longer public, let alone sacred, morality becomes a matter of privately held values, sometimes monetized as commodities, statements of personal preference, often ornamental, sometimes self-servingly instrumental. Whatever their function, values were to be confined to the private sphere. The public sphere was no longer the civic square but rather, the marketplace, the site where one purchased whatever one valued.

New technological spaces are the universal center for (in)human values. The civic square is now Amazon, Alibaba, Twitter, WeChat, and other global online corporations. The facts of our human condition—a century-old phrase uncanny in its echoes today—can be studied in schools as an interdisciplinary complicated conversation about public issues that eclipse private ones (Pinar 2019 ), including social injustice, inequality, democracy, climate change, refugees, immigrants, and minority groups. Understood as a responsive, ethical, humane and transformational international educational approach, such a post-Covid-19 curriculum could be a “force for social equity, justice, cohesion, stability, and peace” (Marope 2017 , p. 32). “Unchosen” is certainly the adjective describing our obligations now, as we are surrounded by death and dying and threatened by privation or even starvation, as economies collapse and food-supply chains are broken. The pandemic may not mean deglobalization, but it surely accentuates it, as national borders are closed, international travel is suspended, and international trade is impacted by the accompanying economic crisis. On the other hand, economic globalization could return even stronger, as could the globalization of education systems. The “new normal” in education is the technological order—a passive technologization—and its expansion continues uncontested and even accelerated by the pandemic.

Two Greek concepts, kronos and kairos , allow a discussion of contrasts between the quantitative and the qualitative in education. Echoing the ancient notion of kronos are the technologically structured curriculum values of quantity and performance, which are always assessed by a standardized accountability system enforcing an “ideology of achievement”. “While kronos refers to chronological or sequential time, kairos refers to time that might require waiting patiently for a long time or immediate and rapid action; which course of action one chooses will depend on the particular situation” (Lahtinen 2009 , p. 252).

For Macdonald ( 1995 , p. 51), “the central ideology of the schools is the ideology of achievement …[It] is a quantitative ideology, for even to attempt to assess quality must be quantified under this ideology, and the educational process is perceived as a technically monitored quality control process”.

Self-evaluation subjectively internalizes what is useful and in conformity with the techno-economy and its so-called standards, increasingly enforcing technical (software) forms. If recoded as the Internet of Things, this remains a curriculum in allegiance with “order and control” (Doll 2013 , p. 314) School knowledge is reduced to an instrument for economic success, employing compulsory collaboration to ensure group think and conformity. Intertwined with the Internet of Things, technological subjectivity becomes embedded in software, redesigned for effectiveness, i.e., or use-value (as Lyotard predicted).

The Curriculum of Things dominates the Internet, which is simultaneously an object and a thing (see Heidegger 1967 , 1971 , 1977 ), a powerful “technological tool for the process of knowledge building” (Means 2008 , p. 137). Online learning occupies the subjective zone between the “curriculum-as-planned” and the “curriculum-as-lived” (Pinar 2019 , p. 23). The world of the curriculum-as-lived fades, as the screen shifts and children are enmeshed in an ocularcentric system of accountability and instrumentality.

In contrast to kronos , the Greek concept of kairos implies lived time or even slow time (Koepnick 2014 ), time that is “self-reflective” (Macdonald 1995 , p. 103) and autobiographical (Pinar 2009 , 2004), thus inspiring “curriculum improvisation” (Aoki 2011 , p. 375), while emphasizing “the plurality of subjectivities” (Grumet 2017 , p. 80). Kairos emphasizes singularity and acknowledges particularities; it is skeptical of similarities. For Shew ( 2013 , p. 48), “ kairos is that which opens an originary experience—of the divine, perhaps, but also of life or being. Thought as such, kairos as a formative happening—an opportune moment, crisis, circumstance, event—imposes its own sense of measure on time”. So conceived, curriculum can become a complicated conversation that occurs not in chronological time but in its own time. Such dialogue is not neutral, apolitical, or timeless. It focuses on the present and is intrinsically subjective, even in public space, as Pinar ( 2019 , p. 12) writes: “its site is subjectivity as one attunes oneself to what one is experiencing, yes to its immediacy and specificity but also to its situatedness, relatedness, including to what lies beyond it and not only spatially but temporally”.

Kairos is, then, the uniqueness of time that converts curriculum into a complicated conversation, one that includes the subjective reconstruction of learning as a consciousness of everyday life, encouraging the inner activism of quietude and disquietude. Writing about eternity, as an orientation towards the future, Pinar ( 2019 , p. 2) argues that “the second side [the first is contemplation] of such consciousness is immersion in daily life, the activism of quietude – for example, ethical engagement with others”. We add disquietude now, following the work of the Portuguese poet Fernando Pessoa. Disquietude is a moment of eternity: “Sometimes I think I’ll never leave ‘Douradores’ Street. And having written this, it seems to me eternity. Neither pleasure, nor glory, nor power. Freedom, only freedom” (Pesssoa 1991 ).

The disquietude conversation is simultaneously individual and public. It establishes an international space both deglobalized and autonomous, a source of responsive, ethical, and humane encounter. No longer entranced by the distracting dynamic stasis of image-after-image on the screen, the student can face what is his or her emplacement in the physical and natural world, as well as the technological world. The student can become present as a person, here and now, simultaneously historical and timeless.

Conclusions

Slow down and linger should be our motto now. A slogan yes, but it also represents a political, as well as a psychological resistance to the acceleration of time (Berg and Seeber 2016 )—an acceleration that the pandemic has intensified. Covid-19 has moved curriculum online, forcing children physically apart from each other and from their teachers and especially from the in-person dialogical encounters that classrooms can provide. The public space disappears into the pre-designed screen space that software allows, and the machine now becomes the material basis for a curriculum of things, not persons. Like the virus, the pandemic curriculum becomes embedded in devices that technologize our children.

Although one hundred years old, the images created in Modern Times by Charlie Chaplin return, less humorous this time than emblematic of our intensifying subjection to technological necessity. It “would seem to leave us as cogs in the machine, ourselves like moving parts, we keep functioning efficiently, increasing productivity calculating the creative destruction of what is, the human now materialized (de)vices ensnaring us in convenience, connectivity, calculation” (Pinar 2019 , p. 9). Post-human, as many would say.

Technology supports standardized testing and enforces software-designed conformity and never-ending self-evaluation, while all the time erasing lived, embodied experience and intellectual independence. Ignoring the evidence, others are sure that technology can function differently: “Given the potential of information and communication technologies, the teacher should now be a guide who enables learners, from early childhood throughout their learning trajectories, to develop and advance through the constantly expanding maze of knowledge” (UNESCO 2015a , p. 51). Would that it were so.

The canonical question—What knowledge is of most worth?—is open-ended and contentious. In a technologized world, providing for the well-being of children is not obvious, as well-being is embedded in ancient, non-neoliberal visions of the world. “Education is everybody’s business”, Pinar ( 2019 , p. 2) points out, as it fosters “responsible citizenship and solidarity in a global world” (UNESCO 2015a , p. 66), resisting inequality and the exclusion, for example, of migrant groups, refugees, and even those who live below or on the edge of poverty.

In this fast-moving digital world, education needs to be inclusive but not conformist. As the United Nations ( 2015 ) declares, education should ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all. “The coming years will be a vital period to save the planet and to achieve sustainable, inclusive human development” (United Nations 2019 , p. 64). Is such sustainable, inclusive human development achievable through technologization? Can technology succeed where religion has failed?

Despite its contradictions and economic emphases, public education has one clear obligation—to create embodied encounters of learning through curriculum conceived as a complicated conversation. Such a conception acknowledges the worldliness of a cosmopolitan curriculum as it affirms the personification of the individual (Pinar 2011 ). As noted by Grumet ( 2017 , p. 89), “as a form of ethics, there is a responsibility to participate in conversation”. Certainly, it is necessary to ask over and over again the canonical curriculum question: What knowledge is of most worth?

If time, technology and teaching are moving images of eternity, curriculum and pedagogy are also, both ‘moving’ and ‘images’ but not an explicit, empirical, or exact representation of eternity…if reality is an endless series of ‘moving images’, the canonical curriculum question—What knowledge is of most worth?—cannot be settled for all time by declaring one set of subjects eternally important” (Pinar 2019 , p. 12).

In a complicated conversation, the curriculum is not a fixed image sliding into a passive technologization. As a “moving image”, the curriculum constitutes a politics of presence, an ongoing expression of subjectivity (Grumet 2017 ) that affirms the infinity of reality: “Shifting one’s attitude from ‘reducing’ complexity to ‘embracing’ what is always already present in relations and interactions may lead to thinking complexly, abiding happily with mystery” (Doll 2012 , p. 172). Describing the dialogical encounter characterizing conceived curriculum, as a complicated conversation, Pinar explains that this moment of dialogue “is not only place-sensitive (perhaps classroom centered) but also within oneself”, because “the educational significance of subject matter is that it enables the student to learn from actual embodied experience, an outcome that cannot always be engineered” (Pinar 2019 , pp. 12–13). Lived experience is not technological. So, “the curriculum of the future is not just a matter of defining content and official knowledge. It is about creating, sculpting, and finessing minds, mentalities, and identities, promoting style of thought about humans, or ‘mashing up’ and ‘making up’ the future of people” (Williamson 2013 , p. 113).

Yes, we need to linger and take time to contemplate the curriculum question. Only in this way will we share what is common and distinctive in our experience of the current pandemic by changing our time and our learning to foreclose on our future. Curriculum conceived as a complicated conversation restarts historical not screen time; it enacts the private and public as distinguishable, not fused in a computer screen. That is the “new normal”.

Adorno, T. W. (2011). Educação e emancipação [Education and emancipation]. São Paulo: Paz e Terra.

Aoki, T. T. (2011). Sonare and videre: A story, three echoes and a lingering note. In W. F. W. Pinar & R. L. Irwin (Eds.), Curriculum in a new key. The collected works of Ted T. Aoki (pp. 368–376). New York, NY: Routledge.

Badiou, A. (2009). Theory of the subject . London: Continuum.

Book   Google Scholar  

Berg, M., & Seeber, B. (2016). The slow professor: Challenging the culture of speed in the academy . Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Couldry, N., & Mejias, U. (2019). The costs of connection: How data is colonizing human life and appropriating it for capitalism . Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Google Scholar  

Daniel, S. J. (2020). Education and the Covid-19 pandemic. Prospects . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-020-09464-3 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Davies, D., Beauchamp, G., Davies, J., & Price, R. (2019). The potential of the ‘Internet of Things’ to enhance inquiry in Singapore schools. Research in Science & Technological Education . https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2019.1629896 .

Delors, J. (1996). Learning: The treasure within . Paris: UNESCO.

Doll, W. E. (2012). Thinking complexly. In D. Trueit (Ed.), Pragmatism, post-modernism, and complexity theory: The “fascinating imaginative realm” of William E. Doll, Jr. (pp. 172–187). New York, NY: Routledge.

Doll, W. E. (2013). Curriculum and concepts of control. In W. F. Pinar (Ed.), Curriculum: Toward new identities (pp. 295–324). New York, NY: Routledge.

Eley, G. (2020). Conclusion. In J. A. Thomas & G. Eley (Eds.), Visualizing fascism: The twentieth-century rise of the global Right (pp. 284–292). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Gil, J. (2020). A pandemia e o capitalismo numérico [The pandemic and numerical capitalism]. Público . https://www.publico.pt/2020/04/12/sociedade/ensaio/pandemia-capitalismo-numerico-1911986 .

Grumet, M.G. (2017). The politics of presence. In M. A. Doll (Ed.), The reconceptualization of curriculum studies. A Festschrift in honor of William F. Pinar (pp. 76–83). New York, NY: Routledge.

Heidegger, M. (1967). What is a thing? South Bend, IN: Gateway Editions.

Heidegger, M. (1971). Poetry, language, thought . New York, NY: Harper and Row.

Heidegger, M. (1977). The question concerning technology and other essays . New York, NY: Harper and Row.

Koepnick, L. (2014). On slowness: Toward an aesthetic of the contemporary . New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

Koopman, C. (2019). How we became our data: A genealogy of the informational person . Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Lahtinen, M. (2009). Politics and curriculum . Leiden: Brill.

Laist, R. (2016). A curriculum of things: Exploring an object-oriented pedagogy. The National Teaching & Learning, 25 (3), 1–4.

Latour, B. (2020). Is this a dress rehearsal? Critical Inquiry . https://critinq.wordpress.com/2020/03/26/is-this-a-dress-rehearsal

Lyotard, J. (1984). The postmodern condition: A report on knowledge . Manchester: Manchester University Press.

Macdonald, B. J. (1995). Theory as a prayerful act . New York, NY: Peter Lang.

Marope, P. T. M. (2017). Reconceptualizing and repositioning curriculum in the 21st century: A global paradigm shift . Geneva: UNESCO IBE.

Marope, P. T. M. (2020). Preventing violent extremism through universal values in curriculum. Prospects, 48 (1), 1–5.

Means, B. (2008). Technology’s role in curriculum and instruction. In F. M. Connelly (Ed.), The Sage handbook of curriculum and instruction (pp. 123–144). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

OECD (2019a). OECD learning compass 2030 . Paris: OECD.

OECD (2019b). Trends shaping education 2019 . Paris: OECD.

Pacheco, J. A. (2009). Whole, bright, deep with understanding: Life story and politics of curriculum studies. In-between William Pinar and Ivor Goodson . Roterdam/Taipei: Sense Publishers.

Pacheco, J. A. (2017). Pinar’s influence on the consolidation of Portuguese curriculum studies. In M. A. Doll (Ed.), The reconceptualization of curriculum studies. A Festschrift in honor of William F. Pinar (pp. 130–136). New York, NY: Routledge.

Pestre, D. (2013). Science, technologie et société. La politique des savoirs aujourd’hui [Science, technology, and society: Politics of knowledge today]. Paris: Foundation Calouste Gulbenkian.

Pesssoa, F. (1991). The book of disquietude . Manchester: Carcanet Press.

Pinar, W. F. (2004). What is curriculum theory? Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Pinar, W. F. (2009). The worldliness of a cosmopolitan education: Passionate lives in public service . New York, NY: Routledge.

Pinar, W. F. (2011). “A lingering note”: An introduction to the collected work of Ted T. Aoki. In W. F. Pinar & R. L. Irwin (Eds.), Curriculum in a new key. The collected works of Ted T. Aoki (pp. 1–85). New York, NY: Routledge.

Pinar, W. F. (2019). Moving images of eternity: George Grant’s critique of time, teaching, and technology . Ottawa: The University of Ottawa Press.

Shew, M. (2013). The Kairos philosophy. The Journal of Speculative Philosophy, 27 (1), 47–66.

Spiller, P. (2017). Could subjects soon be a thing of the past in Finland? BBC News . https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-39889523 .

UNESCO (2015a). Rethinking education. Towards a global common global? Paris: UNESCO.

UNESCO (2015b). Education 2030. Framework for action . Paris: UNESCO. https://www.sdg4education2030.org/sdg-education-2030-steering-committee-resources .

UNESCO (2017). Global citizenship education . Paris: UNESCO. https://en.unesco.org/themes/gced .

United Nations (2015). The sustainable development goals . New York, NY: United Nations.

United Nations (2019). The sustainable development goals report . New York, NY: United Nations.

Wells, W. (2020). Permanent revolution: Reflections on capitalism . Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Westbury, I. (2008). Making curricula. Why do states make curricula, and how? In F. M. Connelly (Ed.), The Sage handbook of curriculum and instruction (pp. 45–65). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

Williamson, B. (2013). The future of the curriculum. School knowledge in the digital age . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Williamson, B. (2017). Big data in education. The digital future of learning, policy and practice . London: Sage.

Žižek, S. (2020). PANDEMIC! Covid-19 shakes the world . New York, NY: Or Books.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Research Centre on Education (CIEd), Institute of Education, University of Minho, Campus de Gualtar, 4710-057, Braga, Portugal

José Augusto Pacheco

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to José Augusto Pacheco .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

My thanks to William F. Pinar. Friendship is another moving image of eternity. I am grateful to the anonymous reviewer. This work is financed by national funds through the FCT - Foundation for Science and Technology, under the project PTDC / CED-EDG / 30410/2017, Centre for Research in Education, Institute of Education, University of Minho.

About this article

Pacheco, J.A. The “new normal” in education. Prospects 51 , 3–14 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-020-09521-x

Download citation

Accepted : 23 September 2020

Published : 24 November 2020

Issue Date : October 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-020-09521-x

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Humanistic tradition
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Europe PMC requires Javascript to function effectively.

Either your web browser doesn't support Javascript or it is currently turned off. In the latter case, please turn on Javascript support in your web browser and reload this page.

Search life-sciences literature (43,991,122 articles, preprints and more)

• Free full text
• Citations & impact

Blended Learning: The New Normal Teaching - Learning Pedagogy Post COVID-19 Pandemic

Author information, orcids linked to this article.

• Saboowala R | 0000-0002-0008-5599

Preprint from Research Square , 13 Apr 2021 https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-410211/v1   PPR: PPR311280 

Preprint version history

• Version 1 [13 Apr 2021]

Abstract 

Free full text .

PPRID: PPR311280 EMSID: EMS122627 Res Sq preprint, version 1, posted 2021 April 13 https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-410211/v1

Affiliations

• 1. Institute of Distance and Open Learning, University of Mumbai, India

Copyright and license information

Copyright notice

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 International license .

The pandemic of COVID-19 has been declared a Public Health Emergency and is of International concern. In the 21st century, everyone is a global citizen. Keeping in mind that the teachers are powerful agents of change and caregivers for the next generation of scientists and doctors, their professional needs cannot be compromised due to the uncertainties that will occur post-pandemic. Sustaining safe school operations or reopening schools after a closure requires many considerations. Similarly, the professional growth of teachers of all types of educational institutions also needs reconsideration. The present situation (of the year 2020) in the world demands teachers and educators to adopt blended learning teaching practices. These practices will not just be for teaching but also for learning. There are several digital educational resources, such as the SWAYAM MOOCs and NPTEL courses are available for the teachers. Along with, many premium global institutions are conducting skill development webinars, short term courses, etc to train and better equip teachers with e-learning tools and technologies. The present study addresses the attitude of 313 teachers towards blended learning approach and its six dimensions viz. learning flexibility, online learning, study management, technology, classroom learning and online interaction as a strategy to meet their professional needs post COVID 19 pandemic era. The present study investigated the attitude of male and female teachers towards blended learning and its dimensions. Also, the study aimed to find the difference in attitude of teachers teaching in English medium institutes and those teaching in institutes having other languages like Hindi, Marathi, Telugu, Kannada, Tamil, etc as their medium of instruction. The results indicated that the attitude of male teachers is greater than that of female teachers with respect to online learning. Also, teachers teaching in English medium institutes have a positive attitude towards Learning Flexibility dimension of blended learning when compared to those teaching in institutes having other medium of instruction. There is a need for a paradigm shift in the education system to create and enable technology dependent learning environments post COVID-19 pandemic which will help in maintaining safety and enhance learning experiences not just for students but for teachers’ professional growth.

Keywords: Blended Learning, Teaching-Learning, In-Service Teachers, COVID-19, e-Learning

Introduction

The year 2020 has led most of the sectors of the society to come to a halt. All educational institutions have also been declared shut in order to handle the further spread of the Covid-19 virus. The ongoing lockdown has suddenly compelled all teachers to adopt online, teaching-learning practices ( Olivier, 2020 ). With a global health crisis in process, the world has begun to look at the future considerations of the present scenario. Reopening of educational institutions is highly unpredictable and hence, blended learning will become the future of educational society. The prolonged period of forced closure has pushed educators throughout the globe towards more extensive use of technology to grant their learners continuity in acquiring knowledge without suffering loss. Post pandemic with the opening of educational institutes, especially schools, blended learning will be important to prioritise the health and wellbeing of not only students but teachers as well. Similarly, the professional growth of teachers will also have to be reconsidered. Priorly, it was possible through various seminars, conferences, refresher courses held by institutions at various localities but things will be different post-pandemic. Hence, a blended learning approach for professional growth of school teachers would be recommended where social norms laid by the government are also considered.

During the time of lockdown in the year 2020, the tables have turned by making the teachers as the learners. Hence, the teachers who have attended or conducted these online training programs and webinars have not just experienced the use of online tools and software as teachers but also have had an experience of using these as a student. The sudden move to online learning has required new investment in devices, learning platforms, connectivity, training and more. Continuing ahead with blended learning will help in taking full advantage of this investment. By continuing to use the devices and online tools, learners will stay comfortable with technology as part of their education-while educators can continue to explore the potential of online learning. Blended learning being one of the approaches suggested where online and offline strategies can be used together for teaching-learning along with following social distancing norms like work from home, avoiding gathering. Blended learning is a model that implements an online and offline approach to teaching and learning with help of technology which will make the learning process more enhanced and will help in catering to a wide audience especially to those who wish to attend but can’t due to geographical distance. This is what will make blended learning a viable model post COVID-19 pandemic ( Education Trends, 2020 ). Along with being working-from home, especially in an Indian house-hold, the role of females varies comparative to that of males. Teaching profession, usually seen as dominant in females, has a different experience of blended learning. Managing time to experiment new technologies and balancing home related chores along with completing work related tasks leads to a different attitude towards this mode of education; teachers are already overwhelmed with work.

For blended learning to work, all learners would need to have the technology and connectivity they need. The institutions conducting professional growth programs for teachers will have to evaluate and adjust their methodologies and curriculums for a blended learning environment that would be flexible for teachers teaching in educational institutes having other languages as medium of instruction apart from English. The teachers have now become learners where they are striving hard to adapt to the new teaching-learning pedagogies in order to help education prosper. Hence this paper emphasis on the comparison of the male and female in-service teachers’ attitude towards adapting blended learning approaches for their professional needs.

Background Of The Study

Several researches globally including that of Hirata Yoko et al (2008) identified that most of the students preferred the online learning to the traditional classes and the combination of online learning and face-to-face learning was advantageous for learners. The study identified that some instructional factors, such as flexibility, goal-focused approach, as well as closely connected relationships between in-class and online instructions are indispensable for students to acquire a set of skills and strategies for successful language learners in hybrid learning environments.

For blended learning, the instructor’s role in an online class environment is a significant factor for learners’ successful and positive learning experiences. Teaching presence and teaching immediacy are found to be significant factors in traditional face-to-face class settings ( Witt et al, 2004 ). It is important to study the influences of these two important factors in an online class environment (Baker, 2010). Next aspect that one should consider is the engagement of students in activities which are fairly easy in face-to-face set-up and equally challenging in online form of learning.

La Roche et al(2012) defined student engagement as activities that involve students’ ‘active cognition processes’. Hence, creating and delivering instruction and learning activities and assignments aimed toward involving learners in online class environments is required for student engagement in an online class context. The challenge of keeping our students engaged and motivated is common across grade levels, subject matter, and all types of institutions and courses. Online courses, however, present a special concern. With students and faculty in contact only via the Internet several new challenges arise. Grandzol (2006) coined that empirical evidence of best practices are the most effective in finding out strategies that help create engaging and interesting online courses. Garrison suggests that teaching presence in online learning environments is an important factor influencing learners’ experiences. “The consensus is that teaching presence is a significant determinant of student satisfaction, perceived learning, and sense of community” ( Garrison, 2007 ).

Hwang and Arbaugh (2006) examined student feedback seeking behavior of the students enrolled in seven blended undergraduate HR and management courses. They assessed that the students who seek positive behaviour tended to participate more actively in discussion forums and seek feedback both inside and outside of class meetings, whereas students having negative feedback-seeking behaviour tended to seek instructions outside of the classroom and participate in more discussion forums but with less intensity.

Raturi R. et al (2011) found that the learners in their sample were keen and enthusiastic about the use of technology. The study revealed that the group was found to be technology. The study also found a high level of digital awareness among female learners and their good access to tools; technology and experience make them capable of studying in blended-learning or e-learning mode. The cohort mentioned in the study indicated its readiness for e-learning, and indicated the emergence of e-learning as a preferred mode of delivery for postgraduate students. This background covers several aspects of blended learning where most of the studies show positive and promising learner and teacher acceptance to this mode of teaching learning.

The challenges and conditions are mostly faced globally by apex institutions of the countries where the high speed internet, tablet/laptop are basic essentials is a problem and and often even a scarcity. With several Indian institutions that are following global curriculums have picked up the cut of blended learning form their international parent set-ups. For the local schools, in the present situations, a new mode of learning environment is a need of the hour. Blended Learning is yet an emerging trend of teaching where the teachers themselves have not thoroughly experienced it. Blended learning in Indian context refers to a strategic and systematic approach to combining times and modes of learning, integrating the best aspects of face-to-face and online interactions for each discipline, using appropriate ICTs ( Pandey, 2019 ). In essence, there is a blending of flexible learning and teaching experiences that may involve assessment, teacher/student communication, student activities, teaching activities and students’ resources. For this, understating the readiness of teachers is pivotal for the success of this change.

Research Methodology, Sampling And Tool

The present study adopted a descriptive survey method for collecting data. The sample was selected by simple random technique which consists of 313 teachers teaching in various educational institutes like schools, colleges, teacher education institutes, management schools, law colleges, etc all over India. Data was collected by circulating google forms due to COVID 19 pandemic. Out of the total in-service teachers 221 were females and 92 were males. 250 teachers were working in educational institutes having English language as their medium of instruction whereas 63 were teaching in institutes having other medium of instruction like Hindi, Marathi, Urdu, Telugu, Kannada, Tamil, etc. The questionnaire for the present study was adapted from Birbal et al. (2018) study on learners’ readiness for blended learning. The instrument consisted of 34 items that measured learners’ attitudes towards six different aspects of blended learning: learning flexibility (4 items); online learning (8 items); study management (6 items); technology (4 items); classroom learning (5 items) and online interaction (7 items). Learning flexibility reflected issues such as access to learning materials and freedom to decide where and when to study and at what pace. Online learning included items on how comfortable teachers felt about self-directed learning. Study management referred to how motivated teachers are to organize their time when studying on-line for their courses. Technology consisted of items that reflected teachers’ familiarity with digital technologies and software. Online interaction refers to teachers’ ability to use web technologies to collaborate with other members of the learning community for assignments and to interact with the lecturer. Classroom learning focused on teachers’ preferences for face-to-face interaction with other teachers and the lecturer during training programs and conferences, seminars or symposiums. Relevant descriptive and inferential analysis was done using Statistical Package for Social Scientists (SPSS-26) for hypothesis testing. The Table 1 below represents the sample size of the study based on gender and medium of instruction of educational institutes where the teachers are presently working.

The above pie chart indicates that out of 313 in-service teachers 29.39% were males and 70.69% were females.

The above pie chart indicates that out of 313 in-service teachers 79.87% teach in English medium institutes and 20.13% teach in institutes following other medium of instruction like Hindi, Marathi, Urdu, Telugu, Kannada, Tamil, etc.

Hypothesis Testing And Interpretation

Following null hypotheses were framed for the present study. Statistical analysis was done using the IBM Statistical Package for Social Scientists (SPSS-26) in order to find out the attitude of male and female in-service teachers from educational institutes and those teaching in english medium and other medium educational institutes towards blended learning and its dimensions. Tables 2 and 3 represent relevant statistical measures used to analyse the data.

(BL = Blended Learning, F1 = Learning Flexibility, F2 = Online Learning, F3 = Study Management, F4 = Technology, F5 = Classroom Learning and F6 = Online Interaction)

Hypothesis 1

There is no significant difference in the attitude of male and female in-service teachers towards blended learning and its following dimensions:

• Learning Flexibility
• Online Learning
• Study Management
• Classroom Learning
• Online Interaction

The t value for male and female in-service teachers for Online learning was found to be 1.945. The p value was found to be 0.53 which is significant at 0.05 level. Therefore, the null hypothesis for the online learning dimension of BL is rejected. Hence, there is a significant difference in the attitude of male and female teachers towards the online learning dimension of blended learning. The mean score for male teachers was 33.07 and for female teachers was 31.21. Thus, it can be concluded that male in-service teachers have a positive attitude towards blended learning when compared to female teachers.

The t value and p value for blended learning and other five dimensions of BL was not significant when gender is considered, thus the null hypothesis is accepted. Therefore, both male and female teachers have similar attitudes towards blended learning and its five dimensions viz. Learning Flexibility, Study Management, Technology, Classroom Learning and Online Interaction.

Hypothesis 2

There is no significant difference in the attitude of in-service teachers towards blended learning and its following dimensions based on medium of instruction of the educational institutes where they are working:

The t value for in-service teachers based on the medium of instruction of the educational institute for Learning Flexibility was found to be 2.309. The p value was found to be 0.017 which is significant at 0.05 level. Therefore, the null hypothesis for Learning Flexibility dimension of BL is rejected. Hence, there is a significant difference in the attitude of in-service teachers teaching in institutes having English language as medium of instruction and teachers teaching in institutes having other languages like Hindi, Marathi, Urdu, Telugu, Kannada, Tamil, etc towards Learning Flexibility dimension of blended learning. The mean score for in-service teachers teaching in institutes having English language as medium of instruction was 14.94 and teachers teaching in institutes having other language as medium of instruction was 13.507. Thus, it can be concluded that teachers teaching in English medium institutes have a positive attitude towards Learning Flexibility dimension of blended learning when compared to those teaching in institutes having other medium of instruction.

The t value and p value for blended learning and other five dimensions of BL was not significant when the medium of instruction of educational institutes is considered, thus the null hypothesis is accepted. Therefore, both teachers teaching in institutions having English and other mediums of instruction have similar attitudes towards blended learning and its five dimensions viz. Online Learning, Study Management, Technology, Classroom Learning and Online Interaction.

Discussion And Conclusion

Based on the finding of this study, male students had a more positive attitude towards online learning than female students. Similar findings were also reported by studies conducted by Yau and Cheng (2012) , Shashaani and Khalili (2001) and Birbal et al (2018) who also found that males have more confidence in using technology for learning than female learners. The differences in attitudes of male and female teachers may be because female teachers have a lower computer self-efficacy which could be a result of cultural factors whereby females are made to believe that computers are the domain of males as far as Indian culture is considered. Also, the present study found that teachers teaching in English medium institutes have a positive attitude towards Learning Flexibility of dimension blended learning when compared to those teaching in institutes having other medium of instruction. Teachers teaching in English medium institutions enjoyed the flexibility of blending learning which afforded them the opportunity to study at their own pace and decide when and where to study without facing any difficulty as far as language is considered as most of the webinars/conferences/workshops/FDPs conducted were in English. The medium of instruction could be an obstruction for teachers teaching in other mediums of instruction as far as learning flexibility is considered.

As more education institutions are moving towards implementing blended learning as a means of enhancing teachers’ professional growth where teachers play the role of learners, it is important to understand their readiness for engaging in adopting this approach. From the present study it is evident that male teachers have a positive attitude towards online learning but the fact cannot be ignored that the education field is female dominant as far as Indian society is considered. Thus, it is essential to develop a positive attitude among female teachers also in order to adopt this approach effectively. Learning flexibility can be enhanced among teachers teaching in institutes having other languages as medium of instruction by encouraging them to seek help from experts who can help them and also initiatives can be taken to organize webinars/workshops/conferences/ FDPs in common language which can be helpful to them and also for their career enhancement. Blended learning is not much applied as far as teachers are considered as learners, thus more research is needed on blended learning and especially in Teacher Education programmes to prove its importance post COVID-19 pandemic.

Acknowledgements

Not applicable

Author Information

moc.liamg@alawoobaszarias

Authors’ information: RS holds a Ph.D. in Education and is a teacher educator engaged in training aspiring teachers in the metropolitan city of Mumbai. RS is affiliated with the full time as well as distance education institutions with an experience of over 5 years. PM is a Computer Scientist and an educationalist working in the field of Education for a premium Distance and Open Learning institution with an experience of over 11 years. She has knowledge and skills of two fields (Computer Science and Education) and is a Teacher Educator for aspiring Teacher Educators.

Authors’ contributions: RS identified the tool and PM made the online form for collecting data. Both RS and PM have distributed tool for data collection. PM did data sorting and RS did data analysis. RS and PM have collaboratively drafted the manuscript.

Competing interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest: The authors state that there are no conflicts of interest.

Declarations

Research involving human participants and/or animals: This article does not contain any studies involving animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent: Informed consent was obtained from all individual human participants involved in the study.

• Pandey Archana . Exploration of Blended Learning in Indian Context: an Strategic Approach . International Journal of Research -Granthaalayah . 2019 ; 7 ( 8 ): 208-211 . https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3381298
• Birbal R , Ramdas M , Harripaul C . Student Teachers’ Attitudes towards Blended Learning . Journal of Education and Human Development . 2018 June ; 7 ( 2 ): 9-26 . https://doi.org/10.15640/jehd.v7n2a2
• Education Trends . Covid-19: will blended learning become the future of education? Acer for Education . 2020 May 18 .
• Garrison DR . Online community of inquiry review: Social, cognitive, and teaching presence issues . Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks . 2007 ; 11 ( 1 ): 61-72 .
• Grandzol CJ . Best practices for online business education . The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning . 2006 ; 7 ( 1 ): 1492-3831 .
• Hwang Alvin , Arbaugh JB . Virtual and Traditional Feedback-Seeking Behaviors: Underlying Competitive Attitudes and Consequent Grade Performance . Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education . 2006 ; 4 : 1-28 . https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4609.2006.00099.x
• Hirata Yoko , Hirata Yoshihiro . Japanese Students’ Attitudes towards Hybrid Learning . Hybrid Learning and Education . 2008 . Retrieved March 16, 2014 from
• La Roche CR , Flanigan MA . Student Use Of Technology In Class: Engaged Or Unplugged? Journal of College Teaching & Learning (TLC) . 2012 ; 10 ( 1 ): 47-54 . https://doi.org/10.19030/tlc.v10i1.7537
• Raturi Shikha , Hogan Robert , Thaman Konai Helu . Learners’ access to tools and experience with technology at the University of the South Pacific: Readiness for e-learning . Australasian Journal of Educational Technology . 2011 ; 27 ( 3 ): 411-427 . 2014
• Shashaani L , Khalili A . Gender and computers: Similarities and differences in Iranian college students’ attitudes toward computers . Computers & Education . 2001 ; 37 ( 3-4 ): 363-375 .
• Olivier Werner . Education post-COVID-19: customized blended learning is urgently needed . The Conversation . 2020 May 24 .
• Witt PL , Wheeless LR , Allen M . A meta-analytical review of the relationship between teacher immediacy and student learning . Communication Monographs . 2004 ; 71 ( 2 ): 184-207 .
• Yau HK , Cheng ALF . Gender differences of confidence in using Technology for learning . The journal of technology studies . 2012 ; 38 ( 2 ): 74-75 .
• Posted April 13, 2021.

Full text links 

Read article at publisher's site: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-410211/v1

Citations & impact 

This article has not been cited yet.

Impact metrics

Alternative metrics.

Europe PMC is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Murray State's Digital Commons

• < Previous

Home > Student Works > Honors College Theses > 94

Honors College Theses

No such thing as a new “normal”: the future of teaching in a pandemic world.

Victoria Benard Follow

Date on Honors Thesis

Spring 5-2022

English Education Secondary Certification

Examining Committee Member

Dr. M. Sue Sroda, Advisor

Dr. Raymond Horton, Committee Member

Dr. Eric Batts, Committee Member

Abstract/Description

Due to the many changes wrought on our society by the COVID-19 pandemic, teachers in high schools have had to dramatically alter their methods of teaching in order to comply with new rules and regulations. These guidelines, deemed safe by the CDC, have completely upended traditional high school classrooms and left teachers scrambling to effectively teach their content and assess student learning. The purpose of this research is to determine the successes and/or failures of high school teachers’ teaching strategies that have undergone dramatic adaptations amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. One goal of this research is to produce a concise understanding of effective teaching strategies for future teachers living in the post-COVID world. I began this project by examining and analyzing past research on effective teaching strategies. Then I conducted interviews with high school English teachers in the Western Kentucky region to obtain a greater understanding of the changes and challenges high schools faced over the course of the pandemic. My research focuses primarily on the teacher perspective, although, when determining the effectiveness of certain teaching strategies, I have taken into account important student variables such as socioeconomic status, learning styles, and their physical, mental, and emotional health. This research argues that, in order to move forward, we cannot allow ourselves to become fixed to a new “normal.” Rather, with the help of technology and continuously evolving teaching strategies, significant growth will become apparent. Through this research I have also highlighted the resilience and ingenuity of our educators in Western Kentucky despite unprecedented circumstances and hope to encourage future generations of aspiring teachers.

Recommended Citation

Benard, Victoria, "No Such Thing as a New “Normal”: The Future of Teaching in a Pandemic World" (2022). Honors College Theses . 94. https://digitalcommons.murraystate.edu/honorstheses/94

Since November 30, 2021

Included in

Online and Distance Education Commons , Secondary Education Commons

• Collections
• Disciplines

Advanced Search

• Notify me via email or RSS

Author Corner

• Submit Thesis/Dissertation

Home | About | FAQ | My Account | Accessibility Statement

Privacy Copyright

• Research article
• Open access
• Published: 15 February 2018

Blended learning: the new normal and emerging technologies

• Charles Dziuban 1 ,
• Charles R. Graham 2 ,
• Patsy D. Moskal   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6376-839X 1 ,
• Anders Norberg 3 &
• Nicole Sicilia 1  

International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education volume  15 , Article number:  3 ( 2018 ) Cite this article

550k Accesses

354 Citations

118 Altmetric

Metrics details

This study addressed several outcomes, implications, and possible future directions for blended learning (BL) in higher education in a world where information communication technologies (ICTs) increasingly communicate with each other. In considering effectiveness, the authors contend that BL coalesces around access, success, and students’ perception of their learning environments. Success and withdrawal rates for face-to-face and online courses are compared to those for BL as they interact with minority status. Investigation of student perception about course excellence revealed the existence of robust if-then decision rules for determining how students evaluate their educational experiences. Those rules were independent of course modality, perceived content relevance, and expected grade. The authors conclude that although blended learning preceded modern instructional technologies, its evolution will be inextricably bound to contemporary information communication technologies that are approximating some aspects of human thought processes.

Introduction

Blended learning and research issues.

Blended learning (BL), or the integration of face-to-face and online instruction (Graham 2013 ), is widely adopted across higher education with some scholars referring to it as the “new traditional model” (Ross and Gage 2006 , p. 167) or the “new normal” in course delivery (Norberg et al. 2011 , p. 207). However, tracking the accurate extent of its growth has been challenging because of definitional ambiguity (Oliver and Trigwell 2005 ), combined with institutions’ inability to track an innovative practice, that in many instances has emerged organically. One early nationwide study sponsored by the Sloan Consortium (now the Online Learning Consortium) found that 65.2% of participating institutions of higher education (IHEs) offered blended (also termed hybrid ) courses (Allen and Seaman 2003 ). A 2008 study, commissioned by the U.S. Department of Education to explore distance education in the U.S., defined BL as “a combination of online and in-class instruction with reduced in-class seat time for students ” (Lewis and Parsad 2008 , p. 1, emphasis added). Using this definition, the study found that 35% of higher education institutions offered blended courses, and that 12% of the 12.2 million documented distance education enrollments were in blended courses.

The 2017 New Media Consortium Horizon Report found that blended learning designs were one of the short term forces driving technology adoption in higher education in the next 1–2 years (Adams Becker et al. 2017 ). Also, blended learning is one of the key issues in teaching and learning in the EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative’s 2017 annual survey of higher education (EDUCAUSE 2017 ). As institutions begin to examine BL instruction, there is a growing research interest in exploring the implications for both faculty and students. This modality is creating a community of practice built on a singular and pervasive research question, “How is blended learning impacting the teaching and learning environment?” That question continues to gain traction as investigators study the complexities of how BL interacts with cognitive, affective, and behavioral components of student behavior, and examine its transformation potential for the academy. Those issues are so compelling that several volumes have been dedicated to assembling the research on how blended learning can be better understood (Dziuban et al. 2016 ; Picciano et al. 2014 ; Picciano and Dziuban 2007 ; Bonk and Graham 2007 ; Kitchenham 2011 ; Jean-François 2013 ; Garrison and Vaughan 2013 ) and at least one organization, the Online Learning Consortium, sponsored an annual conference solely dedicated to blended learning at all levels of education and training (2004–2015). These initiatives address blended learning in a wide variety of situations. For instance, the contexts range over K-12 education, industrial and military training, conceptual frameworks, transformational potential, authentic assessment, and new research models. Further, many of these resources address students’ access, success, withdrawal, and perception of the degree to which blended learning provides an effective learning environment.

Currently the United States faces a widening educational gap between our underserved student population and those communities with greater financial and technological resources (Williams 2016 ). Equal access to education is a critical need, one that is particularly important for those in our underserved communities. Can blended learning help increase access thereby alleviating some of the issues faced by our lower income students while resulting in improved educational equality? Although most indicators suggest “yes” (Dziuban et al. 2004 ), it seems that, at the moment, the answer is still “to be determined.” Quality education presents a challenge, evidenced by many definitions of what constitutes its fundamental components (Pirsig 1974 ; Arum et al. 2016 ). Although progress has been made by initiatives, such as, Quality Matters ( 2016 ), the OLC OSCQR Course Design Review Scorecard developed by Open SUNY (Open SUNY n.d. ), the Quality Scorecard for Blended Learning Programs (Online Learning Consortium n.d. ), and SERVQUAL (Alhabeeb 2015 ), the issue is by no means resolved. Generally, we still make quality education a perceptual phenomenon where we ascribe that attribute to a course, educational program, or idea, but struggle with precisely why we reached that decision. Searle ( 2015 ), summarizes the problem concisely arguing that quality does not exist independently, but is entirely observer dependent. Pirsig ( 1974 ) in his iconic volume on the nature of quality frames the context this way,

“There is such thing as Quality, but that as soon as you try to define it, something goes haywire. You can’t do it” (p. 91).

Therefore, attempting to formulate a semantic definition of quality education with syntax-based metrics results in what O’Neil (O'Neil 2017 ) terms surrogate models that are rough approximations and oversimplified. Further, the derived metrics tend to morph into goals or benchmarks, losing their original measurement properties (Goodhart 1975 ).

Information communication technologies in society and education

Blended learning forces us to consider the characteristics of digital technology, in general, and information communication technologies (ICTs), more specifically. Floridi ( 2014 ) suggests an answer proffered by Alan Turing: that digital ICTs can process information on their own, in some sense just as humans and other biological life. ICTs can also communicate information to each other, without human intervention, but as linked processes designed by humans. We have evolved to the point where humans are not always “in the loop” of technology, but should be “on the loop” (Floridi 2014 , p. 30), designing and adapting the process. We perceive our world more and more in informational terms, and not primarily as physical entities (Floridi 2008 ). Increasingly, the educational world is dominated by information and our economies rest primarily on that asset. So our world is also blended, and it is blended so much that we hardly see the individual components of the blend any longer. Floridi ( 2014 ) argues that the world has become an “infosphere” (like biosphere) where we live as “inforgs.” What is real for us is shifting from the physical and unchangeable to those things with which we can interact.

Floridi also helps us to identify the next blend in education, involving ICTs, or specialized artificial intelligence (Floridi 2014 , 25; Norberg 2017 , 65). Learning analytics, adaptive learning, calibrated peer review, and automated essay scoring (Balfour 2013 ) are advanced processes that, provided they are good interfaces, can work well with the teacher— allowing him or her to concentrate on human attributes such as being caring, creative, and engaging in problem-solving. This can, of course, as with all technical advancements, be used to save resources and augment the role of the teacher. For instance, if artificial intelligence can be used to work along with teachers, allowing them more time for personal feedback and mentoring with students, then, we will have made a transformational breakthrough. The Edinburg University manifesto for teaching online says bravely, “Automation need not impoverish education – we welcome our robot colleagues” (Bayne et al. 2016 ). If used wisely, they will teach us more about ourselves, and about what is truly human in education. This emerging blend will also affect curricular and policy questions, such as the what? and what for? The new normal for education will be in perpetual flux. Floridi’s ( 2014 ) philosophy offers us tools to understand and be in control and not just sit by and watch what happens. In many respects, he has addressed the new normal for blended learning.

Literature of blended learning

A number of investigators have assembled a comprehensive agenda of transformative and innovative research issues for blended learning that have the potential to enhance effectiveness (Garrison and Kanuka 2004 ; Picciano 2009 ). Generally, research has found that BL results in improvement in student success and satisfaction, (Dziuban and Moskal 2011 ; Dziuban et al. 2011 ; Means et al. 2013 ) as well as an improvement in students’ sense of community (Rovai and Jordan 2004 ) when compared with face-to-face courses. Those who have been most successful at blended learning initiatives stress the importance of institutional support for course redesign and planning (Moskal et al. 2013 ; Dringus and Seagull 2015 ; Picciano 2009 ; Tynan et al. 2015 ). The evolving research questions found in the literature are long and demanding, with varied definitions of what constitutes “blended learning,” facilitating the need for continued and in-depth research on instructional models and support needed to maximize achievement and success (Dringus and Seagull 2015 ; Bloemer and Swan 2015 ).

Educational access

The lack of access to educational technologies and innovations (sometimes termed the digital divide) continues to be a challenge with novel educational technologies (Fairlie 2004 ; Jones et al. 2009 ). One of the promises of online technologies is that they can increase access to nontraditional and underserved students by bringing a host of educational resources and experiences to those who may have limited access to on-campus-only higher education. A 2010 U.S. report shows that students with low socioeconomic status are less likely to obtain higher levels of postsecondary education (Aud et al. 2010 ). However, the increasing availability of distance education has provided educational opportunities to millions (Lewis and Parsad 2008 ; Allen et al. 2016 ). Additionally, an emphasis on open educational resources (OER) in recent years has resulted in significant cost reductions without diminishing student performance outcomes (Robinson et al. 2014 ; Fischer et al. 2015 ; Hilton et al. 2016 ).

Unfortunately, the benefits of access may not be experienced evenly across demographic groups. A 2015 study found that Hispanic and Black STEM majors were significantly less likely to take online courses even when controlling for academic preparation, socioeconomic status (SES), citizenship, and English as a second language (ESL) status (Wladis et al. 2015 ). Also, questions have been raised about whether the additional access afforded by online technologies has actually resulted in improved outcomes for underserved populations. A distance education report in California found that all ethnic minorities (except Asian/Pacific Islanders) completed distance education courses at a lower rate than the ethnic majority (California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office 2013 ). Shea and Bidjerano ( 2014 , 2016 ) found that African American community college students who took distance education courses completed degrees at significantly lower rates than those who did not take distance education courses. On the other hand, a study of success factors in K-12 online learning found that for ethnic minorities, only 1 out of 15 courses had significant gaps in student test scores (Liu and Cavanaugh 2011 ). More research needs to be conducted, examining access and success rates for different populations, when it comes to learning in different modalities, including fully online and blended learning environments.

Framing a treatment effect

Over the last decade, there have been at least five meta-analyses that have addressed the impact of blended learning environments and its relationship to learning effectiveness (Zhao et al. 2005 ; Sitzmann et al. 2006 ; Bernard et al. 2009 ; Means et al. 2010 , 2013 ; Bernard et al. 2014 ). Each of these studies has found small to moderate positive effect sizes in favor of blended learning when compared to fully online or traditional face-to-face environments. However, there are several considerations inherent in these studies that impact our understanding the generalizability of outcomes.

Dziuban and colleagues (Dziuban et al. 2015 ) analyzed the meta-analyses conducted by Means and her colleagues (Means et al. 2013 ; Means et al. 2010 ), concluding that their methods were impressive as evidenced by exhaustive study inclusion criteria and the use of scale-free effect size indices. The conclusion, in both papers, was that there was a modest difference in multiple outcome measures for courses featuring online modalities—in particular, blended courses. However, with blended learning especially, there are some concerns with these kinds of studies. First, the effect sizes are based on the linear hypothesis testing model with the underlying assumption that the treatment and the error terms are uncorrelated, indicating that there is nothing else going on in the blending that might confound the results. Although the blended learning articles (Means et al. 2010 ) were carefully vetted, the assumption of independence is tenuous at best so that these meta-analysis studies must be interpreted with extreme caution.

There is an additional concern with blended learning as well. Blends are not equivalent because of the manner on which they are configured. For instance, a careful reading of the sources used in the Means, et al. papers will identify, at minimum, the following blending techniques: laboratory assessments, online instruction, e-mail, class web sites, computer laboratories, mapping and scaffolding tools, computer clusters, interactive presentations and e-mail, handwriting capture, evidence-based practice, electronic portfolios, learning management systems, and virtual apparatuses. These are not equivalent ways in which to configure courses, and such nonequivalence constitutes the confounding we describe. We argue here that, in actuality, blended learning is a general construct in the form of a boundary object (Star and Griesemer 1989 ) rather than a treatment effect in the statistical sense. That is, an idea or concept that can support a community of practice, but is weakly defined fostering disagreement in the general group. Conversely, it is stronger in individual constituencies. For instance, content disciplines (i.e. education, rhetoric, optics, mathematics, and philosophy) formulate a more precise definition because of commonly embraced teaching and learning principles. Quite simply, the situation is more complicated than that, as Leonard Smith ( 2007 ) says after Tolstoy,

“All linear models resemble each other, each non nonlinear system is unique in its own way” (p. 33).

This by no means invalidates these studies, but effect size associated with blended learning should be interpreted with caution where the impact is evaluated within a particular learning context.

Study objectives

This study addressed student access by examining success and withdrawal rates in the blended learning courses by comparing them to face-to-face and online modalities over an extended time period at the University of Central Florida. Further, the investigators sought to assess the differences in those success and withdrawal rates with the minority status of students. Secondly, the investigators examined the student end-of-course ratings of blended learning and other modalities by attempting to develop robust if-then decision rules about what characteristics of classes and instructors lead students to assign an “excellent” value to their educational experience. Because of the high stakes nature of these student ratings toward faculty promotion, awards, and tenure, they act as a surrogate measure for instructional quality. Next, the investigators determined the conditional probabilities for students conforming to the identified rule cross-referenced by expected grade, the degree to which they desired to take the course, and course modality.

Student grades by course modality were recoded into a binary variable with C or higher assigned a value of 1, and remaining values a 0. This was a declassification process that sacrificed some specificity but compensated for confirmation bias associated with disparate departmental policies regarding grade assignment. At the measurement level this was an “on track to graduation index” for students. Withdrawal was similarly coded by the presence or absence of its occurrence. In each case, the percentage of students succeeding or withdrawing from blended, online or face-to-face courses was calculated by minority and non-minority status for the fall 2014 through fall 2015 semesters.

Next, a classification and regression tree (CART) analysis (Brieman et al. 1984 ) was performed on the student end-of-course evaluation protocol ( Appendix 1 ). The dependent measure was a binary variable indicating whether or not a student assigned an overall rating of excellent to his or her course experience. The independent measures in the study were: the remaining eight rating items on the protocol, college membership, and course level (lower undergraduate, upper undergraduate, and graduate). Decision trees are efficient procedures for achieving effective solutions in studies such as this because with missing values imputation may be avoided with procedures such as floating methods and the surrogate formation (Brieman et al. 1984 , Olshen et al. 1995 ). For example, a logistic regression method cannot efficiently handle all variables under consideration. There are 10 independent variables involved here; one variable has three levels, another has nine, and eight have five levels each. This means the logistic regression model must incorporate more than 50 dummy variables and an excessively large number of two-way interactions. However, the decision-tree method can perform this analysis very efficiently, permitting the investigator to consider higher order interactions. Even more importantly, decision trees represent appropriate methods in this situation because many of the variables are ordinally scaled. Although numerical values can be assigned to each category, those values are not unique. However, decision trees incorporate the ordinal component of the variables to obtain a solution. The rules derived from decision trees have an if-then structure that is readily understandable. The accuracy of these rules can be assessed with percentages of correct classification or odds-ratios that are easily understood. The procedure produces tree-like rule structures that predict outcomes.

The model-building procedure for predicting overall instructor rating

For this study, the investigators used the CART method (Brieman et al. 1984 ) executed with SPSS 23 (IBM Corp 2015 ). Because of its strong variance-sharing tendencies with the other variables, the dependent measure for the analysis was the rating on the item Overall Rating of the Instructor , with the previously mentioned indicator variables (college, course level, and the remaining 8 questions) on the instrument. Tree methods are recursive, and bisect data into subgroups called nodes or leaves. CART analysis bases itself on: data splitting, pruning, and homogeneous assessment.

Splitting the data into two (binary) subsets comprises the first stage of the process. CART continues to split the data until the frequencies in each subset are either very small or all observations in a subset belong to one category (e.g., all observations in a subset have the same rating). Usually the growing stage results in too many terminate nodes for the model to be useful. CART solves this problem using pruning methods that reduce the dimensionality of the system.

The final stage of the analysis involves assessing homogeneousness in growing and pruning the tree. One way to accomplish this is to compute the misclassification rates. For example, a rule that produces a .95 probability that an instructor will receive an excellent rating has an associated error of 5.0%.

Implications for using decision trees

Although decision-tree techniques are effective for analyzing datasets such as this, the reader should be aware of certain limitations. For example, since trees use ranks to analyze both ordinal and interval variables, information can be lost. However, the most serious weakness of decision tree analysis is that the results can be unstable because small initial variations can lead to substantially different solutions.

For this study model, these problems were addressed with the k-fold cross-validation process. Initially the dataset was partitioned randomly into 10 subsets with an approximately equal number of records in each subset. Each cohort is used as a test partition, and the remaining subsets are combined to complete the function. This produces 10 models that are all trained on different subsets of the original dataset and where each has been used as the test partition one time only.

Although computationally dense, CART was selected as the analysis model for a number of reasons— primarily because it provides easily interpretable rules that readers will be able evaluate in their particular contexts. Unlike many other multivariate procedures that are even more sensitive to initial estimates and require a good deal of statistical sophistication for interpretation, CART has an intuitive resonance with researcher consumers. The overriding objective of our choice of analysis methods was to facilitate readers’ concentration on our outcomes rather than having to rely on our interpretation of the results.

Institution-level evaluation: Success and withdrawal

The University of Central Florida (UCF) began a longitudinal impact study of their online and blended courses at the start of the distributed learning initiative in 1996. The collection of similar data across multiple semesters and academic years has allowed UCF to monitor trends, assess any issues that may arise, and provide continual support for both faculty and students across varying demographics. Table  1 illustrates the overall success rates in blended, online and face-to-face courses, while also reporting their variability across minority and non-minority demographics.

While success (A, B, or C grade) is not a direct reflection of learning outcomes, this overview does provide an institutional level indication of progress and possible issues of concern. BL has a slight advantage when looking at overall success and withdrawal rates. This varies by discipline and course, but generally UCF’s blended modality has evolved to be the best of both worlds, providing an opportunity for optimizing face-to-face instruction through the effective use of online components. These gains hold true across minority status. Reducing on-ground time also addresses issues that impact both students and faculty such as parking and time to reach class. In addition, UCF requires faculty to go through faculty development tailored to teaching in either blended or online modalities. This 8-week faculty development course is designed to model blended learning, encouraging faculty to redesign their course and not merely consider blended learning as a means to move face-to-face instructional modules online (Cobb et al. 2012 ; Lowe 2013 ).

Withdrawal (Table  2 ) from classes impedes students’ success and retention and can result in delayed time to degree, incurred excess credit hour fees, or lost scholarships and financial aid. Although grades are only a surrogate measure for learning, they are a strong predictor of college completion. Therefore, the impact of any new innovation on students’ grades should be a component of any evaluation. Once again, the blended modality is competitive and in some cases results in lower overall withdrawal rates than either fully online or face-to-face courses.

The students’ perceptions of their learning environments

Other potentially high-stakes indicators can be measured to determine the impact of an innovation such as blended learning on the academy. For instance, student satisfaction and attitudes can be measured through data collection protocols, including common student ratings, or student perception of instruction instruments. Given that those ratings often impact faculty evaluation, any negative reflection can derail the successful implementation and scaling of an innovation by disenfranchised instructors. In fact, early online and blended courses created a request by the UCF faculty senate to investigate their impact on faculty ratings as compared to face-to-face sections. The UCF Student Perception of Instruction form is released automatically online through the campus web portal near the end of each semester. Students receive a splash page with a link to each course’s form. Faculty receive a scripted email that they can send to students indicating the time period that the ratings form will be available. The forms close at the beginning of finals week. Faculty receive a summary of their results following the semester end.

The instrument used for this study was developed over a ten year period by the faculty senate of the University of Central Florida, recognizing the evolution of multiple course modalities including blended learning. The process involved input from several constituencies on campus (students, faculty, administrators, instructional designers, and others), in attempt to provide useful formative and summative instructional information to the university community. The final instrument was approved by resolution of the senate and, currently, is used across the university. Students’ rating of their classes and instructors comes with considerable controversy and disagreement with researchers aligning themselves on both sides of the issue. Recently, there have been a number of studies criticizing the process (Uttl et al. 2016 ; Boring et al. 2016 ; & Stark and Freishtat 2014 ). In spite of this discussion, a viable alternative has yet to emerge in higher education. So in the foreseeable future, the process is likely to continue. Therefore, with an implied faculty senate mandate this study was initiated by this team of researchers.

Prior to any analysis of the item responses collected in this campus-wide student sample, the psychometric quality (domain sampling) of the information yielded by the instrument was assessed. Initially, the reliability (internal consistency) was derived using coefficient alpha (Cronbach 1951 ). In addition, Guttman ( 1953 ) developed a theorem about item properties that leads to evidence about the quality of one’s data, demonstrating that as the domain sampling properties of items improve, the inverse of the correlation matrix among items will approach a diagonal. Subsequently, Kaiser and Rice ( 1974 ) developed the measure of sampling adequacy (MSA) that is a function of the Guttman Theorem. The index has an upper bound of one with Kaiser offering some decision rules for interpreting the value of MSA. If the value of the index is in the .80 to .99 range, the investigator has evidence of an excellent domain sample. Values in the .70s signal an acceptable result, and those in the .60s indicate data that are unacceptable. Customarily, the MSA has been used for data assessment prior to the application of any dimensionality assessments. Computation of the MSA value gave the investigators a benchmark for the construct validity of the items in this study. This procedure has been recommended by Dziuban and Shirkey ( 1974 ) prior to any latent dimension analysis and was used with the data obtained for this study. The MSA for the current instrument was .98 suggesting excellent domain sampling properties with an associated alpha reliability coefficient of .97 suggesting superior internal consistency. The psychometric properties of the instrument were excellent with both measures.

The online student ratings form presents an electronic data set each semester. These can be merged across time to create a larger data set of completed ratings for every course across each semester. In addition, captured data includes course identification variables including prefix, number, section and semester, department, college, faculty, and class size. The overall rating of effectiveness is used most heavily by departments and faculty in comparing across courses and modalities (Table  3 ).

The finally derived tree (decision rules) included only three variables—survey items that asked students to rate the instructor’s effectiveness at:

Helping students achieve course objectives,

Creating an environment that helps students learn, and

Communicating ideas and information.

None of the demographic variables associated with the courses contributed to the final model. The final rule specifies that if a student assigns an excellent rating to those three items, irrespective of their status on any other condition, the probability is .99 that an instructor will receive an overall rating of excellent. The converse is true as well. A poor rating on all three of those items will lead to a 99% chance of an instructor receiving an overall rating of poor.

Tables  4 , 5 and 6 present a demonstration of the robustness of the CART rule for variables on which it was not developed: expected course grade, desire to take the course and modality.

In each case, irrespective of the marginal probabilities, those students conforming to the rule have a virtually 100% chance of seeing the course as excellent. For instance, 27% of all students expecting to fail assigned an excellent rating to their courses, but when they conformed to the rule the percentage rose to 97%. The same finding is true when students were asked about their desire to take the course with those who strongly disagreed assigning excellent ratings to their courses 26% of the time. However, for those conforming to the rule, that category rose to 92%. When course modality is considered in the marginal sense, blended learning is rated as the preferred choice. However, from Table  6 we can observe that the rule equates student assessment of their learning experiences. If they conform to the rule, they will see excellence.

This study addressed increasingly important issues of student success, withdrawal and perception of the learning environment across multiple course modalities. Arguably these components form the crux of how we will make more effective decisions about how blended learning configures itself in the new normal. The results reported here indicate that blending maintains or increases access for most student cohorts and produces improved success rates for minority and non-minority students alike. In addition, when students express their beliefs about the effectiveness of their learning environments, blended learning enjoys the number one rank. However, upon more thorough analysis of key elements students view as important in their learning, external and demographic variables have minimal impact on those decisions. For example college (i.e. discipline) membership, course level or modality, expected grade or desire to take a particular course have little to do with their course ratings. The characteristics they view as important relate to clear establishment and progress toward course objectives, creating an effective learning environment and the instructors’ effective communication. If in their view those three elements of a course are satisfied they are virtually guaranteed to evaluate their educational experience as excellent irrespective of most other considerations. While end of course rating protocols are summative the three components have clear formative characteristics in that each one is directly related to effective pedagogy and is responsive to faculty development through units such as the faculty center for teaching and learning. We view these results as encouraging because they offer potential for improving the teaching and learning process in an educational environment that increases the pressure to become more responsive to contemporary student lifestyles.

Clearly, in this study we are dealing with complex adaptive systems that feature the emergent property. That is, their primary agents and their interactions comprise an environment that is more than the linear combination of their individual elements. Blending learning, by interacting with almost every aspect of higher education, provides opportunities and challenges that we are not able to fully anticipate.

This pedagogy alters many assumptions about the most effective way to support the educational environment. For instance, blending, like its counterpart active learning, is a personal and individual phenomenon experienced by students. Therefore, it should not be surprising that much of what we have called blended learning is, in reality, blended teaching that reflects pedagogical arrangements. Actually, the best we can do for assessing impact is to use surrogate measures such as success, grades, results of assessment protocols, and student testimony about their learning experiences. Whether or not such devices are valid indicators remains to be determined. We may be well served, however, by changing our mode of inquiry to blended teaching.

Additionally, as Norberg ( 2017 ) points out, blended learning is not new. The modality dates back, at least, to the medieval period when the technology of textbooks was introduced into the classroom where, traditionally, the professor read to the students from the only existing manuscript. Certainly, like modern technologies, books were disruptive because they altered the teaching and learning paradigm. Blended learning might be considered what Johnson describes as a slow hunch (2010). That is, an idea that evolved over a long period of time, achieving what Kaufmann ( 2000 ) describes as the adjacent possible – a realistic next step occurring in many iterations.

The search for a definition for blended learning has been productive, challenging, and, at times, daunting. The definitional continuum is constrained by Oliver and Trigwell ( 2005 ) castigation of the concept for its imprecise vagueness to Sharpe et al.’s ( 2006 ) notion that its definitional latitude enhances contextual relevance. Both extremes alter boundaries such as time, place, presence, learning hierarchies, and space. The disagreement leads us to conclude that Lakoff’s ( 2012 ) idealized cognitive models i.e. arbitrarily derived concepts (of which blended learning might be one) are necessary if we are to function effectively. However, the strong possibility exists that blended learning, like quality, is observer dependent and may not exist outside of our perceptions of the concept. This, of course, circles back to the problem of assuming that blending is a treatment effect for point hypothesis testing and meta-analysis.

Ultimately, in this article, we have tried to consider theoretical concepts and empirical findings about blended learning and their relationship to the new normal as it evolves. Unfortunately, like unresolved chaotic solutions, we cannot be sure that there is an attractor or that it will be the new normal. That being said, it seems clear that blended learning is the harbinger of substantial change in higher education and will become equally impactful in K-12 schooling and industrial training. Blended learning, because of its flexibility, allows us to maximize many positive education functions. If Floridi ( 2014 ) is correct and we are about to live in an environment where we are on the communication loop rather than in it, our educational future is about to change. However, if our results are correct and not over fit to the University of Central Florida and our theoretical speculations have some validity, the future of blended learning should encourage us about the coming changes.

Adams Becker, S., Cummins, M., Davis, A., Freeman, A., Hall Giesinger, C., & Ananthanarayanan, V. (2017). NMC horizon report: 2017 higher Education Edition . Austin: The New Media Consortium.

Google Scholar  

Alhabeeb, A. M. (2015). The quality assessment of the services offered to the students of the College of Education at King Saud University using (SERVQUAL) method. Journal of Education and Practice , 6 (30), 82–93.

Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2003). Sizing the opportunity: The quality and extent of online education in the United States, 2002 and 2003. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED530060.pdf

Allen, I. E., Seaman, J., Poulin, R., & Straut, T. T. (2016). Online report card: Tracking online education in the United States, 1–4. Retrieved from http://onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports/onlinereportcard.pdf

Arum, R., Roksa, J., & Cook, A. (2016). Improving quality in American higher education: Learning outcomes and assessments for the 21st century . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Aud, S., Hussar, W., Planty, M., Snyder, T., Bianco, K., Fox, M. A., & Drake, L. (2010). The condition of education - 2010. Education, 4–29. https://doi.org/10.1037/e492172006-019

Balfour, S. P. (2013). Assessing writing in MOOCs: Automated essay scoring and calibrated peer review. Research and Practice in Assessment , 2013 (8), 40–48.

Bayne, S., Evans, P., Ewins, R.,Knox, J., Lamb, J., McLeod, H., O’Shea, C., Ross, J., Sheail, P. & Sinclair, C, (2016) Manifesto for teaching online. Digital Education at Edinburg University. Retrieved from https://onlineteachingmanifesto.wordpress.com/the-text/

Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Borokhovski, E., Wade, C. A., Tamim, R. M., Surkes, M. A., & Bethel, E. C. (2009). A meta-analysis of three types of interaction treatments in distance education. Review of Educational Research , 79 (3), 1243–1289. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654309333844 .

Article   Google Scholar  

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.

Bloemer, W., & Swan, K. (2015). Investigating informal blending at the University of Illinois Springfield. In A. G. Picciano, C. D. Dziuban, & C. R. Graham (Eds.), Blended learning: Research perspectives , (vol. 2, pp. 52–69). New York: Routledge.

Bonk, C. J., & Graham, C. R. (2007). The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs . San Francisco: Pfeiffer.

Boring, A., Ottoboni, K., & Stark, P.B. (2016). Student evaluations of teaching (mostly) do not measure teaching effectiveness. EGERA.

Brieman, L., Friedman, J. H., Olshen, R. A., & Stone, C. J. (1984). Classification and regression trees . New York: Chapman & Hall.

California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office. (2013). Distance education report.

Cobb, C., deNoyelles, A., & Lowe, D. (2012). Influence of reduced seat time on satisfaction and perception of course development goals: A case study in faculty development. The Journal of Asynchronous Learning , 16 (2), 85–98.

Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika , 16 (3), 297–334 Retrieved from http://psych.colorado.edu/~carey/courses/psyc5112/readings/alpha_cronbach.pdf .

Article   MATH   Google Scholar  

Dringus, L. P., and A. B. Seagull. 2015. A five-year study of sustaining blended learning initiatives to enhance academic engagement in computer and information sciences campus courses. In Blended learning: Research perspectives. Vol. 2. Edited by A. G. Picciano, C. D. Dziuban, and C. R. Graham, 122-140. New York: Routledge.

Dziuban, C. D., & Shirkey, E. C. (1974). When is a correlation matrix appropriate for factor analysis? Some decision rules. Psychological Bulletin , 81(6), 358. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0036316 .

Dziuban, C., Hartman, J., Cavanagh, T., & Moskal, P. (2011). Blended courses as drivers of institutional transformation. In A. Kitchenham (Ed.), Blended learning across disciplines: Models for implementation , (pp. 17–37). Hershey: IGI Global.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Dziuban, C., & Moskal, P. (2011). A course is a course is a course: Factor invariance in student evaluation of online, blended and face-to-face learning environments. The Internet and Higher Education , 14 (4), 236–241.

Dziuban, C., Moskal, P., Hermsdorfer, A., DeCantis, G., Norberg, A., & Bradford, G., (2015) A deconstruction of blended learning. Presented at the 11 th annual Sloan-C blended learning conference and workshop

Dziuban, C., Picciano, A. G., Graham, C. R., & Moskal, P. D. (2016). Conducting research in online and blended learning environments: New pedagogical frontiers . New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.

Dziuban, C. D., Hartman, J. L., & Moskal, P. D. (2004). Blended learning. EDUCAUSE Research Bulletin , 7 , 1–12.

EDUCAUSE. (2017) 2017 key issues in teaching & learning. Retrieved from https://www.EDUCAUSE.edu/eli/initiatives/key-issues-in-teaching-and-learning

Fairlie, R. (2004). Race and the digital divide. The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy , 3 (1). https://doi.org/10.2202/1538-0645.1263 .

Fischer, L., Hilton, J., Robinson, T. J., & Wiley, D. (2015). A Multi-institutional Study of the Impact of Open Textbook Adoption on the Learning Outcomes of Post-secondary Students . Journal of Computing in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-015-9101-x .

Floridi, L. (2008). A defence of informational structural realism. Synthese , 161 (2), 219–253.

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Floridi, L. (2014). The 4th revolution: How the infosphere is reshaping human reality . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2013). Blended learning in higher education , (1st ed., ). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Print.

Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education , 7 , 95–105.

Goodhart, C.A.E. (1975). “Problems of monetary management: The U.K. experience.” Papers in Monetary Economics. Reserve Bank of Australia. I.

Graham, C. R. (2013). Emerging practice and research in blended learning. In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of distance education , (3rd ed., pp. 333–350). New York: Routledge.

Guttman, L. (1953). Image theory for the structure of quantitative variates. Psychometrika , 18 , 277–296.

Article   MathSciNet   MATH   Google Scholar  

Hilton, J., Fischer, L., Wiley, D., & Williams, L. (2016). Maintaining momentum toward graduation: OER and the course throughput rate. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning , 17 (6) https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v17i6.2686 .

IBM Corp. Released (2015). IBM SPSS statistics for windows, version 23.0 . Armonk: IBM Corp.

Jean-François, E. (2013). Transcultural blended learning and teaching in postsecondary education . Hershey: Information Science Reference.

Book   Google Scholar  

Jones, S., Johnson-Yale, C., Millermaier, S., & Pérez, F. S. (2009). U.S. college students’ internet use: Race, gender and digital divides. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication , 14 (2), 244–264 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01439.x .

Kaiser, H. F., & Rice, J. (1974). Little Jiffy, Mark IV. Journal of Educational and Psychological Measurement , 34(1), 111–117.

Kaufmann, S. (2000). Investigations . New York: Oxford University Press.

Kitchenham, A. (2011). Blended learning across disciplines: Models for implementation . Hershey: Information Science Reference.

Lakoff, G. (2012). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind . Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Lewis, L., & Parsad, B. (2008). Distance education at degree-granting postsecondary institutions : 2006–07 (NCES 2009–044) . Washington: Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009044.pdf .

Liu, F., & Cavanaugh, C. (2011). High enrollment course success factors in virtual school: Factors influencing student academic achievement. International Journal on E-Learning , 10 (4), 393–418.

Lowe, D. (2013). Roadmap of a blended learning model for online faculty development. Invited feature article in Distance Education Report , 17 (6), 1–7.

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.

Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Kaia, M., & Jones, K. (2010). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning . Washington: US Department of Education.

Moskal, P., Dziuban, C., & Hartman, J. (2013). Blended learning: A dangerous idea? The Internet and Higher Education , 18 , 15–23.

Norberg, A. (2017). From blended learning to learning onlife: ICTs, time and access in higher education (Doctoral dissertation, Umeå University).

Norberg, A., Dziuban, C. D., & Moskal, P. D. (2011). A time-based blended learning model. On the Horizon , 19 (3), 207–216. https://doi.org/10.1108/10748121111163913 .

Oliver, M., & Trigwell, K. (2005). Can ‘blended learning’ be redeemed? e-Learning , 2 (1), 17–25.

Olshen, Stone , Steinberg , and Colla (1995). CART classification and regression trees. Tree-structured nonparametric data analysis. Statistical algorithms. Salford systems interface and documentation. Salford Systems .

O'Neil, C. (2017). Weapons of math destruction: How big data increases inequality and threatens democracy . Broadway Books.

Online Learning Consortium. The OLC quality scorecard for blended learning programs. Retrieved from https://onlinelearningconsortium.org/consult/olc-quality-scorecard-blended-learning-programs/

Open SUNY. The OSCQR course design review scorecard. Retrieved from https://onlinelearningconsortium.org/consult/oscqr-course-design-review/

Picciano, A. G. (2009). Blending with purpose: The multimodal model. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks , 13 (1), 7–18.

Picciano, A. G., Dziuban, C., & Graham, C. R. (2014). Blended learning: Research perspectives , (vol. 2). New York: Routledge.

Picciano, A. G., & Dziuban, C. D. (2007). Blended learning: Research perspectives . Needham: The Sloan Consortium.

Pirsig, R. M. (1974). Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance: An inquiry into values . New York: Morrow.

Quality Matters. (2016). About Quality Matters. Retrieved from https://www.qualitymatters.org/research

Robinson, T. J., Fischer, L., Wiley, D. A., & Hilton, J. (2014). The Impact of Open Textbooks on Secondary Science Learning Outcomes . Educational Researcher. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X14550275 .

Ross, B., & Gage, K. (2006). Global perspectives on blended learning: Insight from WebCT and our customers in higher education. In C. J. Bonk, & C. R. Graham (Eds.), Handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs , (pp. 155–168). San Francisco: Pfeiffer.

Rovai, A. P., & Jordan, H. M. (2004). Blended learning and sense of community: A comparative analysis with traditional and fully online graduate courses. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning , 5 (2), 1–13.

Searle, J. R. (2015). Seeing things as they are: A theory of perception . Chicago: Oxford University Press.

Sharpe, R., Benfield, G., Roberts, G., & Francis, R. (2006). The undergraduate experience of blended learning: A review of UK literature and research. The Higher Education Academy, (October 2006).

Shea, P., & Bidjerano, T. (2014). Does online learning impede degree completion? A national study of community college students. Computers and Education , 75 , 103–111 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.02.009 .

Shea, P., & Bidjerano, T. (2016). A National Study of differences between distance and non-distance community college students in time to first associate degree attainment, transfer, and dropout. Online Learning , 20 (3), 14–15.

Sitzmann, T., Kraiger, K., Stewart, D., & Wisher, R. (2006). The comparative effectiveness of web-based and classroom instruction: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology , 59 (3), 623–664.

Smith, L. A. (2007). Chaos: a very short introduction . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Star, S. L., & Griesemer, J. R. (1989). Institutional ecology, translations and boundary objects: Amatuers and professionals in Berkely’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39. Social Studies of Science , 19 (3), 387–420.

Stark, P. & Freishtat, R. (2014). An evaluation of course evaluations. ScienceOpen. Retrieved from https://www.stat.berkeley.edu/~stark/Preprints/evaluations14.pdf .

Tynan, B., Ryan, Y., & Lamont-Mills, A. (2015). Examining workload models in online and blended teaching. British Journal of Educational Technology , 46 (1), 5–15.

Uttl, B., White, C. A., & Gonzalez, D. W. (2016). Meta-analysis of faculty’s teaching effectiveness: Student evaluation of teaching ratings and student learning are not related. Studies in Educational Evaluation , 54 , 22–42.

Williams, J. (2016). College and the new class divide. Inside Higher Ed July 11, 2016.

Wladis, C., Hachey, A. C., & Conway, K. (2015). Which STEM majors enroll in online courses, and why should we care? The impact of ethnicity, gender, and non-traditional student characteristics. Computers and Education , 87 , 285–308 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.06.010 .

Zhao, Y., Lei, J., Yan, B., Lai, C., & Tan, H. S. (2005). What makes the difference? A practical analysis of research on the effectiveness of distance education. Teachers College Record , 107 (8), 1836–1884. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2005.00544.x .

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the contributions of several investigators and course developers from the Center for Distributed Learning at the University of Central Florida, the McKay School of Education at Brigham Young University, and Scholars at Umea University, Sweden. These professionals contributed theoretical and practical ideas to this research project and carefully reviewed earlier versions of this manuscript. The Authors gratefully acknowledge their support and assistance.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of Central Florida, Orlando, Florida, USA

Charles Dziuban, Patsy D. Moskal & Nicole Sicilia

Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah, USA

Charles R. Graham

Campus Skellefteå, Skellefteå, Sweden

Anders Norberg

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

The Authors of this article are listed in alphabetical order indicating equal contribution to this article. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Patsy D. Moskal .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Student Perception of Instruction

Instructions: Please answer each question based on your current class experience. You can provide additional information where indicated.

All responses are anonymous. Responses to these questions are important to help improve the course and how it is taught. Results may be used in personnel decisions. The results will be shared with the instructor after the semester is over.

Please rate the instructor’s effectiveness in the following areas:

Organizing the course:

Excellent b) Very Good c) Good d) Fair e) Poor

Explaining course requirements, grading criteria, and expectations:

Communicating ideas and/or information:

Showing respect and concern for students:

Stimulating interest in the course:

Creating an environment that helps students learn:

Giving useful feedback on course performance:

Helping students achieve course objectives:

Overall, the effectiveness of the instructor in this course was:

What did you like best about the course and/or how the instructor taught it?

What suggestions do you have for improving the course and/or how the instructor taught it?

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Dziuban, C., Graham, C.R., Moskal, P.D. et al. Blended learning: the new normal and emerging technologies. Int J Educ Technol High Educ 15 , 3 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0087-5

Download citation

Received : 09 October 2017

Accepted : 20 December 2017

Published : 15 February 2018

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0087-5

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Blended learning
• Higher education
• Student success
• Student perception of instruction

• Reference Manager
• Simple TEXT file

People also looked at

Perspective article, effective teaching practices for success during covid 19 pandemic: towards phygital learning.

• 1 Shakti Chaturvedi, School of Management Studies, REVA University, Bengaluru, India
• 2 Sonal Purohit, University School of Business, Chandigarh University, Mohali, India
• 3 Meenakshi Verma, Symbiosis Center for Management Studies, Symbiosis International University, Nagpur, India

Following the outbreak of COVID 19 in February 2020, Indian universities were shut down and used digital platforms to teach their students since then. Drawing from Kolb’s Learning Theory, John Dewey’s theory, Jack Mezirows transformative learning theory, and Jean Piaget’s theory, the authors in this paper offer a viewpoint on some of the practical teaching practices which can be adapted in business schools in India to be successful in this emerging blended or phygital environment. Using a Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework, the authors reflect on the effective teaching practices based on their own experience, theoretical knowledge gained from an exhaustive web search of various databases of the period, particularly from February to August 2020. The authors performed a careful manual content analysis of the selected research papers. They concluded seven principal teaching methods to create an effective blended environment for students and faculties in Indian business schools: a) reframing virtual spaces in India through online knowledge repository and virtual labs b) using reflective thinking for andragogical and pedagogical Indian approach c) Indian teachers’ readiness to offer various genres of courses on demand d) reinforcing resilience in Indian schools through meaningful participation and conflict resolution e) purposeful learning and inquiry-based learning for Indian students f) experiential learning through an inclusive online pivot in India g) useful apps are discussed to reach out to Indian parents community. These initiatives can influence academicians, educationists, podcasters, and the entire teacher fraternity to design an efficient and adequate teaching plan for the student community in India.

Introduction

COVID 19 is an infectious disease caused by a newly discovered virus, “Novel Corona Virus” ( Dhawan, 2020 ). This virus has now become an unparalleled worldwide sensation due to three major reasons: widespread contamination of elevated mortality rate and considerable delay in the formulation of the vaccine. All this has led the government to implement mammoth measures ( Chaturvedi et al., 2020 ). Great efforts are in place to ensure social and physical distancing by convincing the public to stay at home. These endeavors are primarily directed to break the infection chain and ensure a reduced burden on the civic-health machinery. While the onus of all the trouble was laid on the medical facilities, the changes that have been adopted are massive. This has resulted in subsequent commercial and communal defeats. The consequential fiscal and communal exercise of social distancing has led to some major policy changes in the functioning of higher education guided towards “online pivot” ( George, 2020 ). For the first time in the history of the Indian education system, there has been a shift from a face-to-face teaching model to a completely online one ( Zimmerman, 2020 ). The extensive use of digital media is in place. Teachers across the section of the society variably or invariably have had to quickly get used to the online mode of teaching guided towards a digital mindset (Victoria, 2020). The student community is also deeply affected. They have had to let go of their campus life, stay indoors, and attend online classes (Chaturvedi and Pasipanodya, 2019; Govindarajan and Srivastava, 2020 ). Some researchers believe that students who adopt an online learning mode are slightly more receptive than those who “prefer to learn in a traditional face-to-face environment.” However, some other researchers proved that the blended teaching mode yields the best results ( Means et al., 2013 ). The teaching community remains cynical about the success of online teaching and learning pattern. A study conducted on complete reliance on online mode of teaching based on the Technology Acceptance Model ( Davis, 1989 ) has revealed that students and faculty share common concerns regarding the availability of the Internet, student-teacher engagement, and incessant workload ( Wingo et al., 2017 ). In line with this, the Unified Technology Acceptance and System Success (UTASS) model was proposed, which said that system quality, social influence, and facilitating conditions positively impact students’ behavioral intention towards e-learning systems ( Chaturvedi et al., 2018 ; Zhang et al., 2020 ). Fundamentally speaking, the entire student and teacher community must bridge a gap quickly from the offline mode of teaching to complete online mode. This is without a choice for either of them as large sums of money are involved. All this has taken a huge toll on the admissions of students in the Universities. The future of educational institutes remains erratic as the government is unable to arrive at any concrete decision. Despite all these uncertainties, university finances are further affected because of the unstable stock market, reduced or no grants from government bodies. Several small and medium-sized private institutions would be worst affected and eventually close due to the tumultuous finances. Higher education remains the most affected. Meanwhile, Business Schools are also not far from being affected by this pandemic. Some industries have immediately come under the spell of COVID 19, such as all the service sectors. Students who intend to make their careers in these sectors are now compelled to shift their focus to other sectors. The government is doing its best to help the economy, and people recover from this crisis ( Bolaran, 2020 ). However, the fact remains, organizations and sectors that can successfully transform themselves from a physical model of operations to online would be the only ones to survive this crisis. To serve all these needs, the organizations need to turn to a blended model of education, which has been referred to as phygital mode ( George, 2020 ) of education. However, it is challenging for organizations to implement the phygital model most effectively. The burning question here is what can be the effective teaching practices from a phygital perspective? Concerning all these challenges, the authors in this paper throw light on some of the effective teaching practices that could be followed in higher education regarding business schools (B schools) in India to achieve success during these uncertain times of the COVID 19 pandemic. It would be interesting to see the novel teaching practices in the phygital mode. There has been much research on education and teaching in the COVID pandemic. However, none of those have focused on the practices that can increase teaching effectiveness in a phygital mode, specifically in a B school context. Moreover, the empirical or qualitative studies are restricted to the study contexts and fail to present more generalized information. Thus, we collected information from secondary sources to present information that the education institutes can practically use. We use Kolb’s Learning Theory, John Dewey’s theory, Jack Mezirow’s transformative learning theory, and Jean Piaget’s theory to present a viewpoint on some effective teaching practices that can improve teaching effectiveness in a phygital mode. Thus, we intend to contribute to the extant literature on education and teaching practices through this study. We also present a framework based on the research findings that the education institutes can use for designing effective teaching pedagogies.

How Indian Business Schools Would Adapt to This Virtual Teaching?

The authorities may envision a bright future. The management may take this vision to the next level by putting it into practice. However, ultimately it is the teaching fraternity (Faculty members) who would have to work at the ground level to change ( Bates, 2000 ). When it comes to distance learning courses, the primary concern is regarding the infrastructure and internet support from the Institution, quality of lectures as they will be delivered online ( Bao, 2020 ). The research of the adoption of a complete online teaching mode is yet in its nascent stage to recommend anything. Hence institutions have a significant role in lending proper and timely support to adopt a complete online teaching mode. For instance, the exciting research in Computer Vision focuses on predicting the pose of the human head in an image. This describes the object’s rotation in 3D space. By predicting this, we can determine the direction a human head face. Having a computer able to figure out which direction a human head is facing provides many practical applications. For instance, it can be used to map a 3D object to match the direction of the students in the classroom to have the best visual effect on their minds for learning purposes ( Liu et al., 2021 ). Also, in a case study experimentation of Peking University’s online education during COVID 19, few specific instructional strategies were presented to summarize current online teaching experiences for university instructors who might conduct online education in similar circumstances. For instance, online effective delivery mechanism, adequate support provided by faculty and teaching assistants to students, and high-quality participation for better student learning can be followed for better learning experiences ( Bao, 2020 ). The authors have highlighted some benchmarking teaching methods in the following sections of the paper to extract some learnings imparted in Indian business schools in India for the effective pedagogical methods amidst COVID 19. The research objectives of the paper are mentioned in the following section.

Research Objectives

The main objectives of the paper are as follows

 1. To present some successful teaching practices that can be/are followed in Indian Business schools amidst COVID 19.

 2. To understand the challenges that came with adopting technology by both students and faculties amidst COVID 19.

 3. To conclude, some principal teaching methods based on existing theories of learning from literature to create an effective blended environment for students and faculties in Indian business schools amidst COVID 19.

Research Methodology

This study had reviewed several online research articles published, newspaper stories, conference papers, working papers, and books using manual content analysis. It was a cross-sectional analysis where the authors searched various electronic databases in March and then again in June 2020 with no language restrictions. The authors also searched the WHO research database on COVID-19 with the term “school,” which only resulted in one article that was not considered more general than specific to our topic. Therefore, the authors searched again using the keywords such as “teaching practices during COVID 19,” “adoption of technology in higher education during COVID 19,” “learning AND teaching pedagogy during COVID 19,” “Indian business schools AND COVID 19,” “digital learning during the lockdown,” “online teaching during a pandemic,” “education policy during COVID 19” and “phygital learning during the shutdown” and the combinations of these words. All authors performed data management and cleaning. All three authors triple screened (by S.C., S.P., and MV) the articles on title and abstract. The authors excluded viewpoint papers, systematic literature reviews, and studies on other viruses and other languages. The selected research papers were not limited only to India but also from the United States, United Kingdom, and Europe to gain an international view of the topic. As the authors analyzed the papers already written, there was no need to get the formal ethical clearance for citing them. The key themes identified and discussed included “online teaching practices during COVID-19,” “blended mode of teaching in higher education,” and the “shift towards online teaching during COVID 19.”

All full-text downloaded articles identified were reviewed by S.C. The authors maintained to keep highly cited articles out of all downloaded articles for the present study. The authors did not try to rate the quality of studies included in this paper. The authors also included findings of some preprint articles and peer-reviewed articles. Most of the articles cited are from renowned publishers like Elsevier, Emerald, Sage, Springer, Taylor and Francis, and Wiley. The different database searches identified 100 articles, of which 30 full-text articles were assessed, and eighteen were included in this paper. No relevant articles were returned searching the WHO Global Research Database on COVID-19. The search on medRxiv resulted in 20 preprint articles, out of which one was included in the review. In total, 30 journal articles, ten books, eight conference papers, and one working paper were included in this review (see the flowchart Figure 1 below).

FIGURE 1 . Article Selection criteria Flowchart.

Emerging Teaching Practices Discussed

The word technology connotes different meanings to faculty members engaging in different subjects. For example, a teacher of mathematics and a philosophy teacher will have their ways to use technology for teaching their subjects. The word technology is often used in common parlance to digital devices, online and blended systems, scientific artifacts, tools, and other facilitating objects ( Brown and Sammut, 2012 ). At times, technology also refers to engineering procedures that assist in the creation of new gadgets. It is now commonly used even in the arena of teaching (Elen and Clarebout, 2006). Few members of the teaching fraternity who are comfortable using the latest technology for teaching can be termed as those set of individuals who are welcoming the change in the gamut of teaching ( Gershon, 2017 ).

Moreover, such individuals are the ones who are the pioneers in adopting this new digital teaching pedagogy across the globe. The theoretical framework which can be used to understand the online teaching and learning process is the Community of Inquiry (CoI) model (Refer to Figure 2 ), which consists of three critical factors: Social element, Cognitive element, and Teaching element ( Garrison et al., 2000 ). It is the interactions of all three elements of the model that facilitates the educational experience for participants, as illustrated in Figure 2 . Based on this model, Social Presence is understood as the ability of participants to project their characteristics and therefore presenting themselves as real people. Cognitive Presence is defined as the “extent to which the participants in any particular setting can make meaning through sustained communication” ( Garrison et al., 2000 ). Teaching Presence is composed of the design of the educational experience and the creation of sound knowledge to better society ( Garrison et al., 2000 ).

FIGURE 2 . The community of inquiry model ( Garrison et al., 2000 ).

Reframing Brick and Mortar Practices in Virtual Spaces: Reflections From India

In 2006, Chau and Lam talked about unique teaching ideas to suit the age-old “brick and mortar” universities shifting to the online mode of teaching. Currently, India is in the initial stage of adopting an online teaching mode, and we are marching ahead with small but firm footsteps. One such breakthrough in online teaching was achieved through MOOCs (Massive Open Online Courseware) in India. Because of its immense benefits, MOOC is now acknowledged across the globe. It can successfully substitute the face-to-face teaching mode with online teaching by enhancing the pool of wisdom and facilitating blended teaching and learning environment. These online classes can be categorically classified under two heads, synchronous and asynchronous, based on the conduction of the classes. Synchronous mode refers to the type of learning where students and teachers are present at the exact location and at the same time for teaching and learning. This comprises in-person classes (where teachers and students are present in the same classroom), online meetings and live streaming of classes or demonstrations on Zoom, MS Teams, Google meet, and other platforms ( Calongne, 2008 ). Precisely it is a “real-time” type of learning where a group of learners is engaged simultaneously. Hence, it enables collaborations amongst the students and teachers to ask doubts and get them resolved on the spot. For example, webinars, online classrooms, and video conferences are examples of synchronous classes. Asynchronous mode refers to the universal form of teaching and learning that does not happen simultaneously or in the same classroom. The students are not present in the class at a prescribed time. However, they have access to the previously recorded lecture videos of their teachers in addition to online study materials ( Hsiao, 2012 ). Students can respond through emails and any social media network. The teachers generally record their classes. This recording is made available to the students; it is a learner-centered approach, where the students can undertake any course without fulfilling the criteria of being present at the same time and exact location as the tutor. For instance, blogs, youtube videos, and online lectures are examples of synchronous classes. In line with this, the Indian institutes have also experimented with several experiential learning tools, e.g., uploading recorded videos of faculties, creating online discussion forums for students, asking students to upload their self-made videos, and embedding the research into the course curriculum ( Mishra et al., 2020 ). Kolb’s Learning Theory from the literature also emphasizes the “conversational learning” approach, which enabled learners to make meaning and convert experiences into knowledge through the exchange of conversations ( Kolb et al., 2002 ). The major challenge lies with the practical courses that are difficult to deliver online. One of the institutes in India created virtual labs where experiments were demonstrated through video conferencing ( FutureLearn, 2020 ). Another issue was the support for students in remote areas with limited access to high-quality teaching and less knowledge of the English language ( Flack et al., 2020 ). Several tech companies such as BYJU’s worked towards this digital divide and create apps that support live classes and localized language for such communities. However, more needs to be done to cover the digital divide for these communities ( Brundha and Chaturvedi, 2021 ).

Experiential Learning Approach in Creating Virtual Management “Sandbox” in India

The concept of sandbox technology in our paper denotes a cloud or a computer-generated space for teaching. However, the different methodology needs to be adopted for students’ different age groups (adults, middle school students, and kids). This implies the policies and procedures adopted for higher education must necessarily be different for school-level education ( Halupa, 2015 ). Thus, satisfying the needs and requirements of both sets of the audience. The teachers must adhere to an altogether new focus and degree of teaching in the classrooms. The tutor must curb all the obstacles that come his/her way during a teaching in an online platform. For this, the practices of “Experiential Learning” need to be embraced to gauge and then accentuate, strengthen, and communicate the experiences in activities. Experiential learning (E.L.) refers to the procedure that involves “learning by doing,” resulting in gaining specific experience. For instance, a student learns by working in a company during the internship or learning to ride a bike. In this learning, the outcome is based on the involvement in the experience. Prior researchers have contributed several definitions for the E.L., the scope of which is extended to the pedagogies, learning domains, and undertakings (Eyler, 2009; McClellan and Hyle, 2012 ; Morris, 2016 ; Beard and Wilson, 2018 ). The philosophy mentioned above of experiential learning has its roots in John Dewey’s theory. Dewey (1938) emphasized that experience is continuous, and the experiential learning process is of vital importance to adult education. Therefore, E.L. is a procedure that involves immersion and self-direction, resulting in a meaningful experience that helps gain knowledge that can be applied in future contexts. Given the issues of student engagement and impactful learning for the students at the online platform, the faculties have identified ways to implement the experiential learning model (ELM) effectively.

For example, at some universities, the courses were redesigned utilizing the experiential learning module to enable the MBA students to develop presentation skills to enhance their employability. One of the universities used iPads equipped with Panopto’s mobile app, creating an experiential learning opportunity for the physician students. Students made videos of their role-play interacting with patients uploaded on the video content management system of the university from where they were available to the professors who left feedback for the students. On the other hand, some universities are including Industrial Informatics into their master’s degree curriculum to address Industry 4.0. The pandemic has resulted in the growing importance of Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS) in the industry, resulting in great demand for CPS talent and know-how. The mission of academia is to address the needs of the industry for CPS engineers and develop a curriculum to fill the existing gaps in the qualification of the CPS workforce ( Colombo et al., 2020 ).

Offering À La Carte and On-Demand Online Courses in Indian Business Schools

The pandemic has compelled the education institutes to embrace virtual teaching and learning methodology. This has further pressed the institutes to offer an extensive menu of courses and those in great demand. For instance, mechatronic education and experimental systems have, for example, been developed to facilitate experiential education and enhance the learning process in order to encourage students to think. The Mechatronics systems are designed, implemented, programmed, tested, and used by the students successfully within designed Lab sessions. The developed systems have their learning indicators where students acquire knowledge and learn the target skills through engagement, hands-on experience, brainstorming, and interactive discussions ( Habib and Nagata, 2020 ). To provide such courses to the students, first teachers will have to learn these courses to further enhance their knowledge in the respective subject. This is in synchronization to Jean Piaget’s cognitive development of experiential learning. Piaget (2008) asserted that learning is a lifelong process of finding knowledge from experience. Some countries like Germany are surveying the teaching fraternity to understand their requirements, abilities, and career enhancement objectives. Subsequently, when the colleges reopened, they were given free tutoring on the curriculums they were keen on. This exercise is intended to meet the distinctive requirements of teachers. However, the primary motive was to provide skill-based courses to all teachers. Later, these teachers were summoned to teach the same skill-based course to the students. This was the practice followed by some countries like Germany. Taking cues from there, India can follow on these lines and offer professionally motivated courses in Indian B schools.

Strengthening Resilience in Indian Schools in Challenging Times

The word resilience means having the ability to have a successful outcome despite being in a challenging situation ( Masten et al., 1990 ). The school authorities and teachers are solely responsible for promoting resilience amongst the student community in these challenging situations. The authors in the present paper have arrived at specific recommendations to foster resilience amongst the student community towards online teaching with the help of studies conducted by Benard (2004) and Henderson and Milstein (1996) :

 1. It is improving social skills by showing affection and concern towards adults (e.g., instituting absolute optimistic regard, establishing a philosophy of care and mutual admiration, constantly appreciating each-others work).

 2.  Establishing elevated and clear expectations for educational accomplishment and school room conduct (e.g., cooperation and dispute solution, constant enactment of policies and directions, conveying a belief that students are adept at increased academic performance).

 3. Offering prospects for significant involvement in learning (e.g., forming the curriculum so that every child benefits, linking the syllabus to learners, supporting home dialect, offering practical learning, encouraging the use of group activities while teaching the course).

Improving Digital Pedagogical Methodology in India

The teaching pedagogies have been transformed with the information and communication technology (ICT) innovations ( Konig et al., 2020 ). For instance, ICT has facilitated the faculties adoption of student-centric practices such as learning through projects (Law, Pelgrum, and Plomp, 2009 ) that helped the promotion of purposeful learning ( Koh and Chai, 2014 ), inquiry-based learning ( Bell et al., 2013 ) and learning through problem-solution ( Walker et al., 2012 ). Prior researchers have presented strong arguments in favor of ICT as a catalyst for a metamorphosis of the teaching pedagogies ( Beauchamp and Kennewell, 2010 ). The model identifies the interaction between the knowledge of a faculty about the technology, pedagogy, and content for an efficacious utilization of ICT for delivery in a classroom ( Herring et al., 2016 ). There has been much research on the factors that affect the acceptance of technology in education. This includes the adoption of e-learning among the students, e.g., Boateng et al. (2016) , Sanchez et al. (2013), Zhou and Xu (2007) and teachers, e.g., Holzmann et al. (2020) , Salinaz et al. (2017) , Buckenmeyer (2010) , Nicolle and Lou (2008) , Kotrlik and Redmann (2009) . However, the COVID 19 pandemic created a situation wherein both the teachers and students had to adopt the technology not by choice but as an essential requirement for the education system’s smooth functioning. The adoption came with many challenges related to the lack of knowledge about the use of technology by both students and faculties, difficulty finding and selecting a suitable platform for online class delivery, cost of the license, and issues related to the infrastructure unavailability of the Internet in remote areas. This pivots the need for research from factors that affect the technology adoption to the factors that would affect the continued use of technology for blended learning and student benefit. Instead, research that can guide the behavioral change strategy for both students and faculties would be needed.

Moreover, the content delivery and examination pattern required a significant overhaul. The uncertainty of events posited a dilemma for the education institutes and policymakers about the pattern of examination. A need-based approach was followed at the school level. Some primary class students were promoted directly to the next class; an online examination was conducted for several higher semester classes and offline exams for those who appeared for the board (secondary and senior secondary) exams. The universities and Business schools majorly adopted online mode for conducting the examinations as the direct promotion could affect the career and placement. As far as higher education is concerned, it seems that the teaching pedagogies would adopt the blended learning and teaching mode for higher effectiveness.

Transformative Learning for Inclusive Online Pivot in India

The introduction of digital tools has enabled educators towards a blended approach for learning; for instance, flipped classrooms providing room for the enhanced classroom experience. Educators are using the technology to develop videos that enrich the digital content, thus enabling them to utilize the free time for other innovations. According to Jack Mezirows (2003) , in transformative learning theory, learning begins with an experience called a disorienting dilemma (cognitive dissonance, which happens on realizing that your current understanding of the world does not fit with the current evidence). The abrupt, unplanned, and rapid transition into online learning triggered by COVID 19 has contributed to cognitive dissonance because our educational expectations are called into question. If we talk about India, the central issue was faced by the students who are supposed to undertake practical field training called summer internships, where they are supposed to be trained on the job while working with the corporation. The lockdown and closure of most offices resulted in a lack of opportunity for the student to go through this practical training. Several students got the work from a home internship, but they could not learn or get accustomed to the environment and system in which work is done in a corporate ( Srivastava and Chaturvedi, 2014 ). Some institutes facilitated the students by providing them projects that required in-depth study of the field or industry they wanted to cope with. This helped the students to get prepared for the jobs. However, the kind of “mindset change” a student goes through after and on-the-job training was absent. This posits the need to develop an education system of blended learning with an industry interface embedded within the course for a better experience. Here comes the role of a mentor who accelerates preliminary activities that enhance introspection, face challenges, and includes probes and mutual understandings ( Chaturvedi et al., 2019 ). However, it is ideal to understand the requirements of the students and the demands of the course curriculum and then adopt a suitable teaching methodology that is acceptable and understandable by the majority of the audience at large. In the end, the authors support the notion of Sharp and Marchetti (2020) , who said that the natural way should be to choose the correct teaching practice in the present phygital scenario of COVID 19.

The authors point out these examples to take lessons for Indian management schools ( Chaturvedi, 2020 ) where the whole idea of experiential learning through video observation is picking up fast. Moreover, given the difficulties with effective experiential learning with the existing platforms raises a need for the development of e-learning facilities that can be compatible with the extant infrastructure, thus pivoting towards blended learning/phygital learning.

Collaborating With Parents Through School-Wide Online Strategies in India: Apps discussed

As per recent research findings, there has been a substantial drop in the number of parents who believe in the effectiveness of the personalized methods of communication to get informed about student performance, e.g., face-to-face meetings. In India, parents take an interest in the education of students at the university level, and several universities communicate the performance to the parents through various modes such as phone calls. The findings indicate the increasing adoption of digital methods of communication for getting informed about student performance. This opened a door for a new opportunity and apps such as ClassDojo, Spotlight, Remind. Seesaw developed an interface that allows mobile messages, videos, and other alerts about its activities and student performance. For instance, a university used technology to send texts about grades, attendance, and assignment submission to the parents, resulting in an increase in student attendance by 18% and a decline in the course failures by 39% ( Bergman and Chan, 2017 ).

Another example is about a university that sent literacy tips along with text messages to the parents. The outcome was an increased parent-teacher interaction that increased the literacy scores for students. There is an increase in such apps that are parent engaging; a selected few are presented here with their success stories for learning purposes. B schools can adopt the same to enhance the learning experience for students.

ClassDojo is a popular tool that allows the instructors to provide feedback to the parents on students’ behavior. It allows communication in 35 languages. The parents can also obtain information about their child’s school experience and class through pictures and videos. The app is substantially popular among the K-8 schools and has successfully connected with 15 k new schools since 2019. This app can be helpful if implemented in Indian B schools to give parents community feedback about their children.

The Spotlight was developed by Oakland Unified School District (OUSD) in California while looking for means to reach the diverse families in a high-poverty urban district with just 28% of English speakers and above 50 languages spoken over. The video report card application of Spotlight was piloted in three schools in 2015 that 16 schools adopted till the year-end. Spotlight allows the texting of a link to the parents that land them to a personalized video that provides a detailed report on the student performance, including the performance summary in core subjects, areas of improvement, and guidance towards improved learning such as reference of library groups or open-source learning platforms.

Remind is used by Groton elementary school in rural New York to connect with the parents. The instructs can use the app to send personalized and class-wide and school-wide texts to the parents. The instructors send weekly texts about the learning and development of the students that can be translated into above 70 languages. The application also facilitates the sending of pictures of students in class and methods that parents can use to help the students with the homework. The instructors can identify the messages that are read and make decisions about follow-up through other means.

Seesaw was adopted by over 25,000 schools in the United States across 200,000 classrooms and in more than 150 countries for effective learning in the schools. Through this app, the students can describe their learning to the parents in live classroom settings. The student can document their project by video recording, pictures, and audio and show to parents. The text can be sent only after the approval of the instructor, and the parents can respond with questions. Several instructors use the app to communicate the student learning is to the parents. The authors share that these apps can be successfully launched in Indian Business schools to help the school make an inclusive and effective “online pivot” during COVID 19.

Taking cues from some established theories of learning, the authors furnish unique teaching initiatives in this paper to combat the challenges of online teaching put forth because of the novel COVID-19 pandemic (Refer to Figure 3 ). Covid-19 exerted several changes in the education system at a broad scale. The pandemic concurs with the increased potential of information technology. The outcome is likely to reconfigure the teaching pedagogies making use of the information technology. While one cannot deny the importance of the offline education system, the future would be directed towards blended learning guided towards online pivots and a digital mindset. When we move towards digital technology adoption for teaching, several issues need attention. First, the development of an appropriate interface for learning and engagement compatible with the extant infrastructure is required, given the financial concerns of institutes discussed in the opening sections. Second, the efforts must be guided towards the continued adoption of technology for education. Third, due to the limitations about the internships that enabled the B school students to learn in a natural working environment, the pathways for effective experiential learning that can also enhance the skillset and employability of students need to be determined. Lastly, techniques to fill the digital divide for all-inclusive learning need immediate attention. The COVID 19 pandemic has guided the education system towards a new paradigm that needs to be explored for effective blended learning. The authors firmly believe that B schools will rise to the occasion and adopt benchmarking teaching practices, leading to effective student-teacher virtual communication in India.

FIGURE 3 . A pictorial representation of the main findings of the paper.

Future Directions

The study provides valuable insights on effective teaching practices in the online mode in the COVID situation. However, there are several limitations of the study that can be covered in future research. The study is limited to higher education in the context of B Schools in India. Future research can be extended to the other courses in various regions to understand the online teaching practices. Moreover, qualitative data collected through interviews with the beneficiaries and participants can provide a comprehensive understanding of the various online teaching pedagogies ( Adedoyin and Soykan, 2020 ). The shift to online teaching is still in the nascent phase, and the long-term implications and effects are still unknown. Future studies can conduct cross-sectional surveys to analyze the potency of the various teaching practices in online mode. It would be interesting to understand what factors would govern the continued use of the blended learning approach even when the pandemic is over.

Limitations of the Study

The study cannot be generalized in the absence of empirical analysis. Hence there exists a scope for further research by including data collection. The inferences drawn from the study can vary depending upon the size and availability of resources with various universities. The study talks about the extended infrastructure required to adopt online teaching methodology but did not throw much light on the methods in which this infrastructure can be developed. The study focuses on the continued adoption of technology for education. However, given that India is a developing nation and not all institutes and Universities have access to the high technology required for the said purpose, it might take some time for the universities to absorb online learning and teaching.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/Supplementary Material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Author Contributions

SC and SP contributed to the conception, structure of the paper, and interpretation of available literature. SC contributed to the development of the initial draft. MV reviewed and critiqued the output for important intellectual content. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Adedoyin, O. B., and Soykan, E. (2020). Covid-19 Pandemic and Online Learning: the Challenges and Opportunities. Interactive Learn. Environments , 1–13. doi:10.1080/10494820.2020.1813180

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Baloran, E. T. (2020). Knowledge, Attitudes, Anxiety, and Coping Strategies of Students during COVID-19 Pandemic. J. Loss Trauma 25 (8), 635–642. doi:10.1080/15325024.2020.1769300

Bao, W. (2020). COVID-19 and Online Teaching in Higher Education: A Case Study of Peking University. Hum. Behav. Emerg. Technol. 2 (2), 113–115. doi:10.1002/hbe2.191

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Bates, T. (2000). Managing Technological Change: Strategies for College and university Leaders . San Francisco: Jossey-BassJournal of Institute of Education Science , 235. Available at: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED438793 .

Beard, C., and Wilson, J. P. (2018). Experiential Learning: A Practical Guide for Training, Coaching, and Education . Kogan Page Publishers. U.K Available at: https://www.koganpage.com/product/experiential-learning-9780749483036 .

Beauchamp, G., and Kennewell, S. (2010). Interactivity in the Classroom and its Impact on Learning. Comput. Edu. , 54(3), 759–766. Elsevier . Retrieved December 4, 2020, from Available at: https://www.learntechlib.org/p/67148/ . doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.033

Bell, R. L., Maeng, J. L., and Binns, I. C. (2013). Learning in Context: Technology Integration in a Teacher Preparation Program Informed by Situated Learning Theory. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 50 (3), 348–379. doi:10.1002/tea.21075

Benard, B. (2004). Resiliency: What We Have Learned . San Francisco: WestEd Available at: https://www.wested.org/resources/resiliency-what-we-have-learned/ .

Bergman, P., and Chan, E. (2017). Leveraging Technology to Engage Parents at Scale: Evidence from a Randomized Controlled Trial . Available at: http://conference.iza.org/conference_files/EcoEdu_2017/chan_e25715.pdf .

Boateng, R., Mbrokoh, A. S., Boateng, L., Senyo, P. K., and Ansong, E. (2016). Determinants of E-Learning Adoption Among Students of Developing Countries. Int. J. Inf. Learn. Tech. 33 (4), 248–262. doi:10.1108/IJILT-02-2016-0008

Brown, S., and Sammut, C. (2012). International Conference on Inductive Logic Programming . Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer , 1–15. Available at: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-38812-5_1 .September. A Relational Approach to Tool-Use Learning in Robots

Google Scholar

Brundha, S., and Chaturvedi, S. (2021). Present Challenges and Future Opportunities Of Strategic Human Resource Management in COVID 19 Times: A Commentary (No. 5529) . EasyChair Available at: https://easychair.org/publications/preprint/mK53 .

Buckenmeyer, J. A. (2010). Beyond Computers in the Classroom: Factors Related to Technology Adoption to Enhance Teaching and Learning. Cier 3 (4), 27–36. doi:10.19030/cier.v3i4.194

C. Halupa (Editor) (2015). “Transformative Curriculum Design in Health Sciences Education,” (USA: IGI Global ).

Calongne, C. M. (2008). Educational Frontiers: Learning in a Virtual World. Educause Rev. 43 (5), 36–38.

Chaturvedi, D. S., Gowda, K., Chowdari, L., Anjum, A., and Begum, A. (2020). Directive Government Policy and Process for the People amidst COVID-19. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract3755221 December 25, 2020).Accesseddoi:10.2139/ssrn.3755221

Chaturvedi, S., Bahuguna, P. C., and Raghuvanshi, J. (2018). Political Skill as Mediator of the Upward Influence and Career Success Relationship Int. J. Business Excellence 15 (3), 372–391. doi:10.1504/IJBEX.2018.092576

Chaturvedi, S. (2020). Essentials of Management: By Harold Koontz and Heinz Weihrich . Chennai: Tata McGraw Hill Education , 540. doi:10.1080/08832323.2020.1720572Rs. 647, ISBN: 978-9-3392-2286-42015

CrossRef Full Text

Chaturvedi, S., and Pasipanodya, T. E. (2021). A Perspective on Reprioritizing Children's' Wellbeing amidst COVID-19: Implications for Policymakers and Caregivers. Front. Hum. Dyn. 2, 18. doi:10.3389/fhumd.2020.615865

Chaturvedi, S., Rizvi, I. A., and Pasipanodya, E. T. (2019). How Can Leaders Make Their Followers to Commit to the Organization? the Importance of Influence Tactics. Glob. Business Rev. 20 (6), 1462–1474. doi:10.1177/0972150919846963

Clarebout, G., and Elen, J. (2006). Tool Use in Computer-Based Learning Environments: Towards a Research Framework. Comput. Hum. Behav. 22 (3), 389–411. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2004.09.007

Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Q. 13, 319–340. doi:10.2307/249008

Dhawan, S. (2020). Online Learning: A Panacea in the Time of COVID-19 Crisis. J. Educ. Tech. Syst. 49 (1), 5–22. doi:10.1108/978-1-78973-401-02020101310.1177/0047239520934018

Dhawan, S. (2020). Online Learning: A Panacea in the Time of COVID-19 Crisis. J. Educ. Tech. Syst. 49 (1), 5–22. doi:10.1177/0047239520934018

Flack, C. B., Walker, L., Bickerstaff, A., and Margetts, C. (20201989). Socioeconomic Disparities in Australian Schooling during the COVID-19 Pandemic , Melbourne, Australia: Pivot Professional Learning , 13, 319–340. (22 pages)No. 3

FutureLearn (2020). COVID-19: The Best Resources for Online Teaching during Coronavirus .

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., and Archer, W. (2000). Critical Inquiry in a Text-Based Environment: Computer Conferencing in Higher Education. Internet Higher Edu. 2 (2–3), 87–105.

George, M. L. (2020). Effective Teaching and Examination Strategies for Undergraduate Learning during COVID-19 School Restrictions. J. Educ. Tech. Syst. 49 (1), 23–48. doi:10.1177/0047239520934017

Gershon, W. S. (2017). Sound Curriculum: Sonic Studies in Educational Theory, Method, & Practice . Taylor & Francis .

Govindarajan, V., and Srivastava, A. (2020). What the Shift to Virtual Learning Could Mean for the Future of Higher. Harv. Business Rev. 31.

Habib, M. K., and Nagata, F. (2020). Mechatronics: Experiential Education and Project-Based Learning," 2020 21st International Conference on Research and Education in Mechatronics (REM) . Cracow, Poland , 1–6. doi:10.1109/REM49740.2020.93130732020

Henderson, N., and Milstein, M. M. (1996). Resiliency in Schools: Making it Happen for Students and Educators . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc .

Holzmann, P., Schwarz, E. J., and Audretsch, D. B. (2020). Understanding the Determinants of Novel Technology Adoption Among Teachers: the Case of 3D Printing. J. Technol. Transf 45 (1), 259–275. doi:10.1007/s10961-018-9693-1

Hsiao, E. L. (2012). Synchronous and Asynchronous Communication in an Online Environment: Faculty Experiences and Perceptions. Q. Rev. distance Educ. 13 (1), 15.

Koh, J. H. L., and Chai, C. S. (2014). Teacher Clusters and Their Perceptions of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) Development through ICT Lesson Design. Comput. Edu. 70, 222–232. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.08.017

Kolb, D. A., Baker, A. C., and Jensen, P. J. (2002). Conversation as Experiential learningConversational Learning: An Experiential Approach to Knowledge Creation , 51–66.

König, J., Jäger-Biela, D. J., and Glutsch, N. (2020). Adapting to Online Teaching during COVID-19 School Closure: Teacher Education and Teacher Competence Effects Among Early Career Teachers in Germany. Eur. J. Teach. Edu. 43 (4), 608–622. doi:10.1080/02619768.2020.1809650

Kotrlik, J. W., and Redmann, D. H. (2009). Technology Adoption for Use in Instruction by Secondary Technology Education Teachers , 21, 1. doi:10.21061/jte.v21i1.a.3(fall 2009)

Liu, T., Wang, J., Yang, B., and Wang, X. (2021). NGDNet: Nonuniform Gaussian-Label Distribution Learning for Infrared Head Pose Estimation and On-Task Behavior Understanding in the Classroom. Neurocomputing 436, 210–220. doi:10.1016/j.neucom.2020.12.090

Masten, A. S., Best, K. M., and Garmezy, N. (1990). Resilience and Development: Contributions from the Study of Children Who Overcome Adversity. Dev. Psychopathol 2 (4), 425–444. doi:10.1017/s0954579400005812

McClellan, R., and Hyle, A. E. (2012). Experiential Learning: Dissolving Classroom and Research Borders. J. Experiential Edu. 35 (1), 238–252. doi:10.5193/jee35.1.238

M. C. Herring, M. J. Koehler, and P. Mishra (Editors) (2016). Handbook of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) for Educators ( Routledge ).

Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., and Baki, M. (2013). The Effectiveness of Online and Blended Learning: A Meta-Analysis of the Empirical Literature. Teach. Coll. Rec. 115 (3), 1–47.

Mezirow, J. (2003). Transformative Learning as Discourse. J. transformative Educ. 1 (1), 58–63. doi:10.1177/1541344603252172

Mishra, L., Gupta, T., and Shree, A. (2020). Online Teaching-Learning in Higher Education during Lockdown Period of Covid-19 Pandemic. Int. J. Educ. Res. Open 1, 100012. 100012. September 10 2020. doi:10.1016/j.ijedro.2020.100012

Morris, L. V. (2016). Experiential Learning for All. Innov. High Educ. 41 (2), 103–104. doi:10.1007/s10755-016-9361-z

Nicolle, P. S., and Lou, Y. (2008). Technology Adoption into Teaching and Learning by Mainstream University Faculty: A Mixed Methodology Study Revealing the "How, when, Why, and Why Not". J. Educ. Comput. Res. 39 (3), 235–265. doi:10.2190/ec.39.3.c

Piaget, J. (2008). Developmental Psychology: Incorporating Piaget's and Vygotsky's Theories in Classrooms. J. cross-disciplinary Perspect. Educ. 1 (1), 59–67.

Plomp, T., and Voogt, J. (2009). Pedagogical Practices and ICT Use Around the World: Findings from the IEA International Comparative Study SITES2006. Educ. Inf. Technol. 14 (4), 285–292. doi:10.1007/s10639-009-9090-3

Salinas, Á., Nussbaum, M., Herrera, O., Solarte, M., and Aldunate, R. (2017). Factors Affecting the Adoption of Information and Communication Technologies in Teaching. Educ. Inf. Technol. 22 (5), 2175–2196. doi:10.1007/s10639-016-9540-7

Sharp, G. F., and Marchetti, J. J. (2020). “Playing in the Sandbox: A Reflective Journey on the Development and Implementation of a Leadership Development Program within a Doctoral Program,” in Maturing Leadership: How Adult Development Impacts Leadership . Editor J. Reams ( Emerald Publishing Limited ), 241–259. doi:10.1108/978-1-78973-401-020201013

Srivastava, A. K., and Chaturvedi, S. (2014). Negative Job Experiences and Employees Job Attitudes and Health in High‐Performance Work Organizations. Metamorphosis 13 (2), 22–28. doi:10.1177/0972622520140205

Walker, A., Recker, M., Ye, L., Robertshaw, M. B., Sellers, L., and Leary, H. (2012). Comparing Technology-Related Teacher Professional Development Designs: A Multilevel Study of Teacher and Student Impacts. Education Tech Res. Dev 60 (3), 421–444. doi:10.1007/s11423-012-9243-8

Walter Colombo, A., Jan Veltink, G., Roa, J., and Laura Caliusco, M. (2020). Learning Industrial Cyber-Physical Systems and Industry 4.0-Compliant SolutionsIEEE Conference on Industrial Cyberphysical Systems (ICPS) . Tampere: Finland , 384–390. doi:10.1109/ICPS48405.2020.92747382020

Wingo, N. P., Ivankova, N. V., and Moss, J. A. (2017). Faculty Perceptions about Teaching Online: Exploring the Literature Using the Technology Acceptance Model as an Organizing Framework. Online Learn. 21 (1), 15–35. doi:10.24059/olj.v21i1.761

Zhang, Zhaoli., Cao, Taihe., Shu, Jiangbo., and Liu, Hai. (2020). Identifying Key Factors Affecting College Students' Adoption of the E-Learning System in Mandatory Blended Learning Environments. Interactive Learn. Environments . doi:10.1080/10494820.2020.1723113

Zhou, G., and Xu, J. (2007). Adoption of Educational Technology: How Does Gender Matter? Int. J. Teach. Learn. higher Educ. 19 (2), 140–153.

Zimmerman, J. (2020). Coronavirus and the Great Online-Learning Experiment. The Chronicle of Higher Education . Available at: https://www.chronicle.com/article/Coronavirusthe-Great/248216 (accessed onMARCH 10, 2020 April 29, 2020).

Keywords: digital learning, experiential learning, effective teaching methods, blended learning, phygital learning, reinforcing resilience, business schools, COVID 19 pandemic

Citation: Chaturvedi S, Purohit S and Verma M (2021) Effective Teaching Practices for Success During COVID 19 Pandemic: Towards Phygital Learning. Front. Educ. 6:646557. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2021.646557

Received: 27 December 2020; Accepted: 28 May 2021; Published: 10 June 2021.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2021 Chaturvedi, Purohit and Verma. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Shakti Chaturvedi, [email protected]

This article is part of the Research Topic

Covid-19 and Beyond: From (Forced) Remote Teaching and Learning to ‘The New Normal’ in Higher Education

Adjusting to the New Normal

• Posted August 14, 2020
• By Jacqueline Zeller

As the summer winds down, there are still many unknowns about what school will look like in some communities. Schools and parents are working hard to plan for how to best keep children and educators safe while providing quality education to students.

Below are some ideas parents and other primary caregivers may consider to help children adjust to the circumstances of this school year, with its many uncertainties. Many of these ideas are in line with the National Association of School Psychologists and American School Counselor Association’s Reentry Considerations and guidance regarding talking to children about COVID. This piece is meant to be informational in nature and not to provide medical advice or recommendations. These are general considerations, but parents should contact their own providers for individualized advice for their families and children.

• Talk with your child’s school and/or medical or professional provider to consult on what makes the most sense to support your child and family in the transition back to school. Each child is unique, and parents can adapt ideas to the individual needs of their children and family.  
• Provide developmentally appropriate and honest information regarding the beginning of the school year to help students understand what to expect. It is important to leave time for children to ask questions . When adults remain calm in the conversation, while offering information about successfully transitioning back to school, they can help children gain an increased sense of control. It is best not to overly focus on the news or unnecessary details that might cause increased distress to children. In general, with younger children, brief descriptions (with accurate information) are helpful. Children will respond to your emotions. Offer love and reassurance and remind children that adults, including their teachers and parents, are working to keep children safe.
• Listen to children’s questions and concerns . Remember that young children might also communicate through play.
• If children return to in-person school, they will need to be taught new routines regarding physical distancing, hygiene, wearing masks (when required), sharing, etc. It will be important that these new social expectations are taught and reinforced with patience and care. Parents may communicate with the school to understand the new expectations so that they can also have discussions and/or practice at home as needed. For example, parents might practice wearing masks or hand-washing at home. Social stories, books, comic strips, and role-playing that model and educate about the new social routines may also be useful ways to reinforce new school expectations at school and at home.  
• Connecting with the school and reading school communications can also help parents reinforce expectations with common words/phrases in both the home and school settings, when appropriate, so that children are better able to connect concepts. For example, if the phrases “social distancing” or “hygiene” are used in the school setting it might be helpful to use the same words at home when reinforcing expectations regarding the new routines.

"When children have predictable routines, feel cared for, and have a sense of safety, they have a stronger foundation to learn. Making sure that there is a balanced approach to the curriculum that acknowledges the importance of supporting children’s well-being during the start of the school year will be important."

• Connect with your child’s school if you have specific questions or concerns regarding fall plans, mental health, and family support needs, including food and/or housing assistance, etc. If parents notice significant behavioral or mood changes, they can also connect with school and/or community agencies to get referrals, if needed. Parents can connect with school counselors, school psychologists, school adjustment counselors and/or school social workers if they feel a child might benefit from additional supports at school and/or in the community. Some families might choose to reach out to their medical providers for referrals and resources for their needs. Even if these needs aren’t apparent at the beginning of the school year, keep lines of communication open with the school and providers should such needs arise at a later point. Every family and child will have their own needs, and connecting with a professional trained to help can offer more tools and resources.
• If children will be returning to school in-person, prior to the start of school, parents may consider walking or driving by the school if it is safe to do so, and if they feel it would support their child’s comfort with the transition back to school or to starting a new school.  
• If the school provides a way to do so, connect with the new teacher ahead of time to help increase the child’s comfort level. For example, some schools may have a teacher familiar to the child from a previous year introduce the new teacher or offer back-to-school events to meet teachers (even virtually). This way, students can see the teacher is excited to meet them and work with them.
• Parents of children with special needs may want to communicate any additional questions or concerns to school staff regarding available supports in the upcoming school year and how they can help their children with the beginning of the school year.
• Providing a routine is helpful to children. Knowing that the routine might need to change depending on the ongoing health situation, parents can try to plan and give warnings as much as possible if changes occur. Visual reminders of routines can also be helpful with young children.

Given the current situation, focusing on the well-being of the child will be important — especially during the beginning of the school year. The adjustment back to school is always just that — an “adjustment” — and this year brings unprecedented challenges. When children have predictable routines, feel cared for, and have a sense of safety, they have a stronger foundation to learn.  Making sure that there is a balanced approach to the curriculum that acknowledges the importance of supporting children’s well-being during the start of the school year will be important.

Parents are working hard and balancing multiple responsibilities. Parents who remember to be kind and patient with themselves, and to reach out for support when they need it, can more effectively care for their children and model positive coping strategies.

Usable Knowledge

Connecting education research to practice — with timely insights for educators, families, and communities

Related Articles

Hope and Resilience in Childhood

The Art of Talking With Children

Ten ways to jumpstart conversations with kids that will help them bounce back from challenges

The Negative Effects of Remote Learning on Children's Wellbeing

• LEARNING SKILLS
• Teaching, Mentoring, Coaching and Counselling
• Strategy for Teachers: Teaching Kids in the Time of Coronavirus

Search SkillsYouNeed:

Rhubarb The blog at SkillsYouNeed

• Rhubarb Front Page -guidelines for contributors-
• COVID19 and The New Normal
• Essential Remote Work Skills to Survive a Permanent WFH Role
• Providing Ongoing Employee Training to Remote Staff: A Guide for Business Leaders
• Maintaining A Healthier Regime for Full-time Remote Workers
• An 8-Step Process to Getting Organized in Your Remote Work
• 6 Tools to Improve Your Remote Content Team Collaboration
• eCommerce During the Coronavirus Pandemic and Why You Need Your Own Website
• The Skills SMBs Need to Succeed in an Unusual Holiday Season
• Why Remote Work Won't Change for Tech Workers Even After the Pandemic is Officially 'Over'
• Will Remote Work Be the New Normal Even After the Pandemic?
• 10 Essential Tips for Remote Workers: Work from Home Made Simple
• The Three P’s of Pandemic Leadership
• How Can We Adequately Prepare for Long-Term Remote Working?
• How COVID-19 Can Impact Your Business and How to Be Successful Despite It
• 5 Marketing-Based Skills to Learn During Lockdown
• Teaching Children during the COVID-19 Pandemic: 7 Tips for Teachers
• How to Maintain Company Culture During Social Isolation
• COVID-19: 7 Life Skills to Learn During Lockdown
• How to Keep Your Relationships Healthy During COVID-19 Crisis
• How to Keep Your Business Afloat During the Coronavirus Pandemic

Subscribe to our FREE newsletter and start improving your life in just 5 minutes a day.

You'll get our 5 free 'One Minute Life Skills' and our weekly newsletter.

We'll never share your email address and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Teaching Children during the COVID-19 Pandemic 7 Tips for Teachers

In years to come, when your students tell others about their schooling during the COVID-19 pandemic, what do you want them to remember about your teaching methods?

Surely, you want them to remember that they had a teacher who cared about what they were going through, who assigned material that mattered, and who helped them maintain some sense of normalcy while the rest of the world was falling apart.

But this is all easier said than done.

Teaching during a pandemic is a new challenge for most educators and we're all still figuring out a rhythm that works.

For most countries, the 2019-2020 school year was finished via online classes - and since there are so many unknowns when it comes to the virus itself and the social distancing it is creating, there's a possibility that when classes start again in September, those will be online, too.

Don't let the stress of the coronavirus pandemic dampen your love for teaching. Here are 7 tips for teaching online during COVID-19.

Practice, Practice, Practice

Teaching students online wasn't what you signed up for when you became an educator. Nevertheless, this is a role you must fulfill until social distancing becomes a thing of the past.

You shouldn't expect perfection from yourself or your students during the first few months of online learning.

What you should be doing is practicing like there's no tomorrow.

Practice making videos for your classes

Practice different lighting and sound setups so your students can get the most out of your videos

Practice making answering student e-mails a regular part of your day

Practice having online hours to speak with your students

Practice making a new curriculum that will teach your students what they need to know amidst the crisis the world is facing

Practice using apps and teaching your students how to use the technology they will need to continue getting an education amidst the pandemic

Communicate with Your Students

When it comes to teaching and communicating with students online, it's okay to address the elephant in the room.

Coronavirus is an anxiety-inducing topic for most people and it's probably weighing on the minds of your students. Talk about it. Get it out in the open and use it as an opportunity to comfort and refocus your students.

Remind your students that it's good to be informed about world events, but that fixating on news articles about COVID-19 can do more harm than good.

Suggest only reading articles about the virus once a day and only from credible sources like the World Health Organization. This will help prevent the spread of misinformation and reduce stress.

Show Availability

Even after going through months of the pandemic, students still have a lot of questions about how online classes stack up to their in-person counterparts.

Communication is key when it comes to teaching students online.

As teachers continue to transition to online classes, students are going to have a boatload of questions to ask.

• What's changed in our class?
• What's due and when?
• Is there any make-up work I can do to help boost my grade?
• How can I cope with depression while trying to get my schoolwork done?
• What classes will be live and what won't?
• How are exams going to work during the pandemic?
• Does our syllabus still apply?

Sending out a weekly e-mail detailing new videos, readings, and assignments for the coming weeks can also be incredibly helpful for keeping students organized.

Having online office hours will also be a game-changer for both teachers and students during the coronavirus pandemic.

Create a Sense of Community

What does a community have to do with teaching online? A lot

Your students are used to being in a community atmosphere when they are in class. They are used to seeing their friends and having assignments with other students. The sudden shift to social isolation can leave your students feeling downcast, which can distract from learning.

Anna Lee, an online tutor working at SmileTutor, equips “I always build a sense of community amongst my students by creating a WhatsApp group chat with the entire class and encouraging them to exchange phone numbers and stay in touch.”

Make a Routine

Children thrive when they have consistency and routine in their lives - and that includes their online classes. Once you make a class schedule, do not deviate from it.

Assign Work That Matters

With many students experience stress and anxiety over their futures, teaching online during COVID-19 not the time to assign your students with busywork.

You want to provide accurate, helpful, and engaging material. You can do this by:

Assigning stimulating or creatively challenging homework

Having regular live-chats or video tutorials to ensure your students are grasping the work assigned

Being funny and engaging as you teach

Breaking learning up into smaller sessions that are easily digested by anxious students

It can also be helpful to acknowledge a student's work, commenting on what they did right and what they can improve at. Knowing that a student has your attention and is being assigned goals will help keep them motivated.

Be Optimistic

We may not know what the future holds, but it's important to be optimistic, especially when it comes to teaching our students.

Using phrases like, "When we're back in class together next year" and addressing the future with positivity can boost student morale and keep their spirits up.

The happier your students are, the harder they will work in class.

Don't let the chaos of this pandemic ruin your love for teaching or your student's love for learning. You can find ways to be an effective, attentive teacher amidst the madness happening around the world. Teachers can help kids in the age of coronavirus by being available, communicative, and by supplying an education that matters.

About the Author

Monica a self-driven person and loves to spend her leisure time reading interesting books that come her way. She is passionate about writing and collecting new books. She believes in hard work and it is her persistence that keeps her doing better. She is a perfectionist and doesn’t let go off things that don’t appear perfect to her. She loves traveling whenever she needs time off of her busy schedule. Her favorite holiday destination is Hawaii.

Continue to: Organisational Skills for Teachers Motivation Skills for Teachers

See also: It Takes a Teacher: The Impact and Inspiration of Being an Educator Learning Styles | Study Skills Should a Teacher Be Strict or Friendly with Students?

• Online Course Delivery and Instruction , Online Education

Synchronous Strategies for the “New Normal”

• July 13, 2020
• Zahir I. Latheef

Connecting with students is one of the most rewarding aspects of a professor’s job.  Some faculty hesitate to teach online, frequently offering the rationale: “I want to connect with my students. There’s just not enough interaction and engagement online!”  Faculty are not alone in yearning for this connection – students want it too ! 

Frustrated by the lack of real-time exchanges with students, I incorporated live or synchronous sessions into my online classes a few years ago.  I experimented with the latest tools and made adjustments each semester based on feedback from students.  To my surprise, students consistently requested more synchronous engagement.  After doing so, I gained a new appreciation for the potential of creating meaningful connection virtually. 

When many universities rushed to provide remote instruction due to the COVID-19 pandemic, I leaned on my synchronous experience to train faculty on the pedagogical potential of platforms like Zoom.  Training amidst this crisis gave me insights on what instructors new to synchronous teaching struggled with the most.  In this article, I share these insights and provide four strategies for optimizing the student experience in synchronous sessions.   

#1. Plan and Organize Thoughtfully

Organization and course design are especially important in online environments.  In designing your synchronous sessions, think through the pedagogical value of each component, placing your students’ learning and experience at the heart of your plan. 

Part of being student-centered is recognizing their limited attention spans and planning accordingly.   Gavett (2014) notes that many employees spend their virtual meetings doing other work, cooking, eating, or Amazon shopping.  Online students are now multitasking more than ever, balancing the extra demands on their time.  Running long sessions, especially past 60-90 minutes, increases the likelihood of competing distractions. Carefully review your game plan before each session and create a minute-by-minute schedule.  Sharing an outline at the start helps students follow along and you can save valuable time by opening all files you will need ahead of time.

Being efficient requires the instructor to recognize asynchronous portions as complements to live engagement.  Ask yourself, “Can I accomplish the same goal asynchronously?” For example, student introductions can be time-consuming in a larger synchronous class.  Instead, have students use a Discussion Board or a video-based platform such as FlipGrid .  For largely one-way communication, record a video and ask students to watch it before/after class.

#2. Clarify Purpose, Norms, and Expectations

While synchronous sessions may be new to some instructors, oftentimes students are also unfamiliar with this format.  Even if they participated in synchronous sessions before, those experiences may vary greatly.  Laying the foundations of why and how you conduct your class helps set expectations, creating a shared class culture where students take more responsibility for their participation.

Record a video before your first live session explaining the purpose (“How will these sessions contribute to student learning and growth”), any equipment they will need (e.g., camera/mic), and your expectations of engagement. Clarify aspects such as, “Are these sessions required or optional? How does this fit into my grade? Is there an asynchronous alternative if I cannot join?”

Establishing an expectation of cameras turned on can greatly enrich the experience for students and instructor.  For students, cameras create a focused learning environment with less distraction – one much better than “dialing-in from the road.”  Video also helps the instructor know when students are lost, bored, or at least that they’re still present! 

Instructors should model for students an effective virtual presence.  Ensure the lighting in your environment allows students to see you clearly. Stay in the center of the frame and look into the camera when speaking (Don’t worry, even Comedian Jon Stewart had to be reminded by The Daily Show host Trevor Noah on how to do this correctly).

Consider investing in an HD webcam, headset, or an external mic (e.g., Blue Yeti).  While these may seem like luxuries, being able to see and hear the instructor well greatly enhances the student experience.

#3. Build Community through Faculty-Student and Student-Student Interaction

Social check-ins create community.  If I only turn on my camera and audio right at the start of class, that would be similar to walking in the door of my in-person class right at the scheduled start time and going straight into teaching.  Whether in-person or online, those precious minutes before and after class are critical for answering questions and connecting with students. Login several minutes before class and greet students as they come in.  Consider starting with fun virtual exercises .

Synchronous technologies have evolved considerably from text-based chat rooms common in the 90’s .  In Zoom, breakout rooms can be used to create student-student interaction for think-pair-share or team-based exercises.  Just make sure directions are extra clear before you send them to their virtual rooms and post in your Learning Management System (LMS) beforehand any worksheets or instructions they will need.  Zoom even allows you to float the room, checking-in on groups as they work. Students are often most surprised by breakout rooms – they never expected live interaction with their peers in online learning!  

#4. Use Technology but Be Careful of Going Overboard  

Today’s platforms are equipped with so many engagement tools it can feel overwhelming, even for students.  I suggest starting with polling as a relatively easy to use option, especially since instructors may already use them in the classroom.  Polling can be an effective way to engage students with practice exam questions, ice breakers, or general pulse checks (“Rate your understanding of this concept”).  Build polling into your game plan as warm-ups or transitions between activities.  Polling can also be used to create student-centered discussion similar to the use of Clickers .

Accessibility is often a challenge in online courses . Thankfully, a number of tools have made accessibility easier.  When using cloud recording, Zoom auto-captions the session enabling students to watch a closed-captioned recording after class.  If using GoogleSlides, students can see live captioning during class.

In sum, when it comes to technology, take a gradual approach.  Sometimes, when faculty learn about all the tools available, in our zeal to create the best possible experience for students, we run the risk of trying to do too much.  Avoid jumping headfirst into the bells and whistles, giving yourself time to grow incrementally.  As you gain more experience, you’ll learn which tools best fit with your teaching style and pedagogical strategy.

The COVID-19 pandemic has many of us teaching in unfamiliar situations.  Perhaps a silver lining has been the widespread practice of synchronous instruction, a potential remedy for the connection students and faculty often miss in traditional online classes.  The exponential growth of synchronous sessions will likely shape a “new normal” for online learning, long after the pandemic has passed.

Zahir I. Latheef is an assistant professor of management at the University of Houston-Downtown teaching courses on leadership, teams, and nonprofits.  Once a skeptic of online learning, Zahir is now an OLC Advanced Certified Instructor and regularly provides training and coaching for faculty on synchronous instruction.

Gavett, G. (2014). What people Are Really Doing When They’re on a Conference Call. Harvard Business Review . https://hbr.org/2014/08/what-people-are-really-doing-when-theyre-on-a-conference-call

Hakala, C. (2015). Why can’t students just pay attention? Faculty Focus. https://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/effective-teaching-strategies/why-cant-students-just-pay-attention/

Lorenzetti, J.P. (2014). Four crucial factors in high-quality distance courses. Faculty Focus. https://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/online-education/four-crucial-factors-high-quality-distance-learning-courses/

Madjidi, F., Hughes, H. W., Johnson, R. N., & Cary, K. (1999). Virtual learning environments. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED429565.pdf

Martin, F. & Bolliger, D.U. (2018). Engagement matters: Student perceptions on the importance of engagement strategies in the online learning environment. Online Learning, 22(1), 205222. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1179659.pdf

Moore, E.A. (2014). Improve accessibility in tomorrow’s online courses by leveraging yesterday’s techniques. Faculty Focus. https://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/online-education/improve-accessibility-tomorrows-online-courses-leveraging-yesterdays-techniques/

Santhanam, S.P. (2020). A reflection on the sudden transition: Ideas to make Your synchronous online classes more fun. Faculty Focus. https://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/online-education/ideas-to-make-your-synchronous-online-classes-more-fun/

Shepard, L. (2012). Using student clickers to foster in-class debate. Faculty Focus. https://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/effective-teaching-strategies/using-student-clickers-to-foster-in-class-debate/

St. Amour, Madeline. (2020). A double whammy for students. Inside HigherEd. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020/03/31/student-parents-are-hit-doubly-hard-coronavirus

Udermann, B. (2019). Seven things to consider before developing your online course. Faculty Focus.  https://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/online-education/seven-things-to-consider-before-developing-your-online-course/

Wehler, M. (2018). Five ways to build community in online classrooms.  Faculty Focus. https://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/online-education/five-ways-to-build-community-in-online-classrooms/

Stay Updated with Faculty Focus!

Get exclusive access to programs, reports, podcast episodes, articles, and more!

• Opens in a new tab

Welcome Back

Username or Email

Remember Me

Already a subscriber? log in here.