• Background• Alternatives to blending • Assessment of the alternatives • Policy implications• Conclusion

Alternative 1. Status quo – Primarily focus on addressing issues of access

and convenience– based on individual faculty, unit initiatives

Alternative 2. Enhancing blends– adds on– for example continue to teach as in

alternative one above but add an optional discussion board

Alternative 3. Transformative blends– a transformative process directed toward

improving the quality of the educational experience

– overall institutional initiative – capitalize on the potential of BL for engagement

• Criteria used

– economic criteria

– equity criteria

– Administrative criteria

– Political criteria

Measure 0= not satisfied, 1= satisfied

Measure Yes = 1, no = 0

Alternatives

1 2 3

Will the alternative increase accessibility 1 1 1

Offer equal opportunity to benefit? 0 0 1

Increase flexibility? 0 0 1

Measure Yes = 1, no = 0

Alternatives

1 2 3

Acceptability 1 0 1Responsiveness 0 0 1Appropriate 0 0 1Ethical Issues 1 1 1

Measure Yes = 1, no = 0

Alternative

1 2 3

Clarity of goal 1 0 1Commitment to serve 1 1 1Capacity to implement 1 1 0

1=yes,0=no

Political criteria

Equity criteria

Admin criteria

Total points

Alternative 1 2 1 3 *60%

Alternative 2 2 1 2 *50%

Alternative 3 4 3 2 *90%

• Administrators – How to determine the fit of blended learning

within the stated goals and priorities of the institution.

– How to set time lines, and accountabilities for implementation.

– How to establish appropriate ownership of intellectual property in a blended learning environment.

• How about tuition and fee structure for a blended leaning course

• How to collaborate with other departments, units• Finally, how to establish guidelines for approval of a

blended learning course.

• Faculty – Compensation and workload issues – BL development incentive – Faculty development and training

• Student– Learners support would be needed for the

online component – How do we orientate, and support learners in

using technology in blended courses. – Particular attention to international, and First

Nations communities

• It is cost effective (Means, 2010)• satisfied all our criteria and • has the potential to transform the teaching and

learning experience of the University (Garrison and Vaughan, 2010).