Blended Learning Researches in Iran: Several Fundamental Criticisms

Authors

  • Farhad Seraji faculty member of Bu Ali Sina University https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1479-5919
  • Muhammad Attaran DepartmentofCurriculumandInstructionalTechnology,FacultyofEducation,UniversityofMalaya,50603KualaLumpur,MALAYSIA
  • Seyyed Mohsen Azizi PhD. In Distance Education Planning, Clinical Research Development Center of Imam Reza Hospital, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, Kermanshah, Iran

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1344/der.2019.36.190-206

Keywords:

blended learning, research, criticisms, terminology, methodology, blended levels

Abstract

The present study seeks to critically review the state of the blended learning researches in the Iranian context. For this critique, 47 papers about blended learning were found in a number of indexing databases and their contents were analyzed. The contents mainly revolved around use of relevant terminology, features of blended learning, methodology, levels of blended learning, variables of the study, and the analyzed educational programs. Some major criticisms that can be leveled at these studies include limited range of terminology, inappropriate use of key concepts, overemphasis on quantitative methods, overuse of pseudo-empirical method, lack of case studies, mistaking blended learning for application of computers in education, excessive concentration on the level of educational programs, superficial treatment of the distinction between learning and retaining, lack of attention to some of the variables of blended learning, and use of blended learning for primary and secondary education.

Author Biography

Farhad Seraji, faculty member of Bu Ali Sina University

Associate Professor of Curriculum

References

Allen, I. E., Seaman, J., & Garrett, R. (2007). Blending in: The extent and promise of blended education in the United States. Sloan Consortium. PO Box 1238, Newburyport, MA 01950.

Antonoglou, L. D., Charistos, N. D., & Sigalas, M. P. (2011). Design, development and implementation of a technology enhanced hybrid course on molecular symmetry: Students’ outcomes and attitudes. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 12(4), 454–468. http://doi.org/10.1039/C0RP90013C

Arbaugh, J. B., Desai, A., Rau, B., & Sridhar, B. S. (2010). A review of research on online and blended learning in the management disciplines: 1994–2009. Organization Management Journal, 7(1), 39-55.

Arispe, K., & Blake, R. J. (2012). Individual factors and successful learning in a hybrid course. System, 40(4), 449-465. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2012.10.013.

Bleed, R. (2001). A hybrid campus for the new millennium. EDUCAUSE Review, 36(1), 16–24. Retrieved from https://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/erm0110.pdf.

Boelens, R., De Wever, B., & Voet, M. (2017). Four key challenges to the design of blended learning: A systematic literature review. Educational Research Review, 22(4), 1-18. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.06.001.

Carman, J. M. (2005). Blended Learning Design: Five Key Ingredients. Blended Learning Design: 5 Key Ingredients, 1–10. Retrieved from http://www.agilantlearning.com/pdf/Blended Learning Design.pdf.

Cuesta. M. L. (2018). Blended learning: Deficits and prospects in higher education. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 34(1), 42-56. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3100

Dziuban, C., & Picciano, A. (2015). The evolution continues. ECAR Research, 6(15), 1-19.Available from http://www.educause.edu/ecar.

Graham, C. R., Woodfield, W., & Harrison, J. B. (2013). A framework for institutional adoption and implementation of blended learning in higher education. The internet and higher education, 18, 4-14. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.09.003.

Gedik, N., Kiraz, E., & Ozden, M. Y. (2013). Design of a blended learning environment: Considerations and implementation issues. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology. 29(1),1-19.

Kyei-Blankson, L. & Godwyll, F. (2010). An Examination of Learning Outcomes in Hyflex Learning Environments. In J. Sanchez & K. Zhang (Eds.), Proceedings of E-Learn 2010--World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 532-535). Orlando, Florida, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 4, 2018 from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/35598/.

Johnson, J. V., Abia, M., & Quest, R. (2016, January). A comparison of blended and traditional approaches to computing and informatics instruction in Namibia Outcomes and consequences for a developing nation. In International Conference on Computer Science Education Innovation & Technology (CSEIT). Proceedings (p. 111). Global Science and Technology Forum.

Johnson, S.D & Daugherty. J (2008). Quality and Characteristics of Recent Research in Technology Education. Journal of Technology Education. 20(1).16- 31.

Margulieux, L. E., Bujak, K. R., McCracken, W. M., & Majerich, D. M. (2014, January). Hybrid, blended, flipped, and inverted: Defining terms in a two dimensional taxonomy. In Paper accepted to the 12th Annual Hawaii International Conference on Education. Honolulu, HIJanuary (Vol. 2014, pp. 5-9).

Moskal, P., Dziuban, C., & Hartman, J. (2013). Blended learning: A dangerous idea? The Internet and Higher Education, 18(2), 15–23. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.12.001

Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (2011). Distance education: A systems view of online learning. Cengage Learning: USA.

Oliver, M., & Trigwell, K. (2005). Can ‘blended learning ‘be redeemed? E-learning and Digital Media, 2(1), 17-26.

Ochoa, G., Hyde, M., Curtois, T., Vazquez-Rodriguez, J. A., Walker, J., Gendreau, M., & Burke, E. K. (2012, April). Hyflex: A benchmark framework for cross-domain heuristic search. In European Conference on Evolutionary Computation in Combinatorial Optimization (pp. 136-147). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

Picciano, A. G. (2009). Blending with purpose: The multimodal model. Journal of the Research Center for Educational Technology, 5(1), 4-14.

Ross, B., & Gage, K. (2006). Global perspectives on blending learning. BonkJ. C. GrahamR. C.(Eds.), The handbook of blended learning, 155-168.

Sands, P. (2002). Inside outside, upside downside: Strategies for connecting online and face-to-face instruction in hybrid courses. Teaching with Technology Today, 8(6), 12-23. Retrieved from http://www.uwsa.edu/ttt/articles/sands2.htm.

Seraji. F., Safari. S (2015). Developing Blended learning in Iranian Banks: a step up to quality improvement or Escape Form e-learning standards. Journal of Training & Development of Human Resources,2015, 4(2), 17-38.

Sloan Consortium. (2007). blending in: The extent and promise of blended education in the United States. Retrieved from http://olc.onlinelearningconsortium.org/publications/survey/blended06.

Stoffberg, E. M., & Blignaut, A. S. (2008). A case for multimodal training of electronic databases at a higher education institution. South African journal of libraries and information science, 74(1), 1-8.

Turner, F., & Crews, J. (2005). Bricks and clicks: A comparative analysis of online and traditional education settings. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(4), 3-8

Downloads

Published

2019-12-31

Issue

Number 36, December 2019

Section

Peer Review Articles

License

The authors who publish in this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication.
  2. The texts published in Digital Education Review, DER, are under a license Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4,0 Spain, of Creative Commons. All the conditions of use in: Creative Commons,
  3. In order to mention the works, you must give credit to the authors and to this Journal.
  4. Digital Education Review, DER,  does not accept any responsibility for the points of view and statements made by the authors in their work.