Defining Online and Blended Learning

The Differences between Online and Blending Learning
From my perspective, online and blended learning differ in that blended learning environments involve synchronous learning experiences, whereas online learning involves only asynchronous experiences. While it’s possible for online learning to involve optional synchronous experiences, such as live sessions and open office hours, I do not interpret these activities as creating a blended learning environment because learners can succeed in the course without choosing to participate in them.

Another important difference between online and blended learning is instructor presence. This difference has been studied extensively over the last couple decades, dating back to the 20^th century with findings from Newman, Webb, & Cochrane (1997) that computer-conferencing students – students involved in learning via online, text-based forums – are more likely to bring in external materials and link their ideas with solutions, while students participating in live discussions do a better job of novel idea generation (as cited in Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 1999, p. 93). In online learning, lectures and tutorials are usually prerecorded and posted to the learning management system (LMS), while in blended learning, some form of in-person lecturing is utilized.

In relation to instructor presence, learner presence also contributes to the difference between online and blended learning. Blended learning is beneficial to learners who have the ability to attend the course in person; if they do not, a fully online learning option facilitated exclusively through an LMS would provide those learners with more flexibility. This issue of physical accessibility is another important difference between online and blended learning experiences. Online learning can be accessed from anywhere in the world with adequate internet access, via LMS. Blended learning, on the other hand, requires the in-person, physical presence of learners.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Online and Blended Learning
Online and blended learning experiences have their own respective advantages and disadvantages. In terms of online learning, flexibility in attendance is an option given that location is not a significant factor for the learning experience. This form of learning also provides increased flexibility in deliverable completion due to the asynchronous nature of most online deliverables. Media in online learning experiences can be carefully scripted, filmed professionally with an instructional design team, and posted strategically throughout a course space to maximize impact on the learner experience.

On the other hand, online learning is unaccommodating for learners who thrive in traditional, in-person learning environments. Upkeep of online learning course spaces is deceptively difficult as well, and online courses that do not ensure documents and media containing references to previous years, old course iterations, and outdated information can be perceived by learners as poorly maintained and low quality. LMS consisting of poorly produced media and messy, typo-ridden instructional material can also have a negative impact on learners.

Regarding blended learning, learners have the opportunity to enjoy a ‘best of both worlds’ experience in which they can expect personable, face-to-face lectures in coordination with a well-designed course space that seamlessly integrates online technologies into the blended learning experience. For instance, while blended learning provides the instructor with an opportunity to lecture in a traditional format, prerecorded versions of lectures can be added to the virtual component of the course, as well. Through this hybrid structure, various learning styles can be accommodated based on individual preferences and needs, creating flexibility for learners. 

However, even if the blended component only happens once or twice per course, learners are still obligated to ensure they can be present in the classroom for those sessions. This physical restriction can create barriers to entry for learners interested in the course material but who live outside of the city, state, or country – and also barriers to entry for nontraditional learners who work full-time, or who have mental or physical health conditions that prevent them from participating in a traditional classroom environment. Additionally, the online component of a blended learning experience has the potential to be neglected if an instructor overemphasizes the in-person component of the course. As a result, learners may be forced to undergo a lopsided learning experience in which the in-person component of a course is executed successfully, while the technology intended to support the virtual component of the course is neglected and fails to support the objectives of the blended learning experience.

The Future of Online and Blended Learning
Online and blended learning have the potential to generate significant profit for an institution given the higher degree of iterability and automation involved in these learning experiences. However, these types of learning require buy-in from instructors and faculty. With the opportunities from online and blended learning comes the potential for administrative overreach and lack of program sustainability if faculty are not provided with adequate support and proof that the online or blended venture is lucrative and of comparable quality to traditional learning experiences (Kentnor, 2015).

Moving forward, both blended and online learning instructors will need appropriate levels of support depending on the technology employed in their courses. In both cases, instructors’ discipline-specific knowledge should continue to be taken into consideration when organizing, presenting, and applying course material during the course conceptual model creation phase (Conceição & Howles, 2021). Online learning instructors can benefit from the aid of a well-funded instructional design team, who can assist with the production of professional instructional materials and media, and who can help facilitate robust and well-structured course spaces. Blended learning instructors need a similar source of aid, but also need to be able to trust that their instructional design team will allow them to utilize the blended learning space as they see fit, whether it be through the provision of recorded versions of in-person lectures, or a synthesis of virtual and in-person assessments.

Future online and blended learning experiences will likely continue to involve the integration of emergent technologies such as generative AI, but experts who perceive this tech to embody the irrefutable future of learning are entrenched in another technology hype cycle (Johnson, 2015). Generative AI and related smart tech are quickly approaching Stages 2 and 3 of the cycle – the peak of inflated expectations and the trough of disillusionment – when it comes to the widespread presence and usefulness of this tech in traditional course spaces. Once the productivity plateaus – Stage 5! – and we step back to see what remains, it will be the instructors and content experts who still prove critical for the development of successful learning experiences. As such, faculty buy-in will still be required to ensure these experiences can both retain and maintain the levels of quality, creativity, and professionalism that modern learners have come to expect from online and blended environments.

References

Conceição, S.C.O., & Howles, L. (2021). Designing the online learning experience: Evidence-based principles and strategies. Stylus Publishing, LLC. 

Johnson, A. T. (2015). The technology hype cycle. IEEE pulse, 6(2), p. 50.

Kentnor, H. E. (2015). Distance education and the evolution of online learning in the United States. Curriculum and teaching dialogue, 17(1), p. 21-34.

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (1999). Critical Inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2), p. 87-105.