Summary

The article, The Promise of Personalized Learning, describes a Los Angeles charter school’s experience

with implementing a non-traditional classroom style: the blended (or hybrid) learning model (Headden,

2013). Whereas this ‘rotational model’ (p.16) is known as BLAST (Blended Learning for Alliance School

Transformation) in this California school, the Pennsylvania version is known as PA HLI (PA Hybrid

Learning Initiative). The model, which incorporates both the regular teaching presentation with

computer-assisted learning as an enhancement, was experimented with at Tennenbaum Tech High

School, beginning in the fall of 2011 with students who were having problems attaining credits in order

to graduate on time. At Tennenbaum, approximately 65% of the incoming students were not on track

credit-wise upon entering in 2011. By the year’s end, after two semesters of hybrid learning where

formative assessment data was utilized to shape instruction, the average student at Tennenbaum was

performing on the eighth grade level, as compared to their entry scores at the fourth grade level.

One student in particular, Patty Berganza, who entered Tennenbaum with a history of high

absenteeism and no plans for continuing her education past high school is featured as a success. After

one year of experiencing this classroom structure, both Patty and her classmates began to realize their

potential and actively plan their futures in college. Additionally, both course grades and standardized

testing results have improved dramatically as students gained interest and became more involved in

daily class activities. Headden claims that the strength of this blended program lies in the fact that

students daily experience multiple styles of teaching and learning. Students are grouped into one of

three groups that rotate at one-third and two-thirds of the way through class to different stations:

direct instruction (traditional style teaching), independent learning (computer-based programs for

reinforcement and remediation), and collaborative groups (groups of four students working as a team

on an assignment or project). While direct instruction introduces course material, the independent

station allows for practice and assessing online. With this station student progress is tracked so the

teacher can recommend to individual students to re-do lessons and retake quizzes to result in more

progress. At the collaborative station, students offer ideas in order to complete a group project or task

that is related to the material being taught. In breaking the class into thirds and offering three distinct

styles of learning, the student can experience learning and assessment in a variety of ways, and this

gives the program its strength in raising grades, standardized scores, and interest in learning. Within

this multi-methods format lies the ability to personalize learning – more than what is possible when

either traditional or computer-based learning are used solely or individually.

Reaction

Headden is certainly an advocate of this innovative teaching-learning style, but she does caution

that the model has limitations. She clarifies that the online formative assessing doesn’t necessarily

pinpoint weaknesses, and then further asserts that it is extremely important that teacher feedback drive

changes and improvements in the program, especially within the independent exercises. With these

points in mind and the fact that I have witnessed and implemented this model in two of the schools in

which I substitute, I have become comfortable and confident in the model’s structure and purpose.

Actually, I am surprised that I am reacting favorably to such a different teaching/learning style (I am a

traditional-style teacher), but after watching and interacting with hybrid classes, I have come to realize

that the blending of good, solid practices that both motivate and allow the student to take charge of

his/her learning and progress produces a better learner who is encouraged to become an independent,

life-long learner. Additionally, with this structure, the teacher and students can work within smaller

groups so overall class size is not so much a concern (and thus cost-effective for the district).

Relevance to Career

It seems reasonable to assume that almost every one of today’s students have been exposed to a

variety of media from a very young age and have learned basic and more advanced concepts (including

academic, procedural, and mechanical) by having a parent demonstrate the device or by directly

learning through his/her own inquisitiveness. Since this is most likely assumed true, it is normal and

even expected that students should have technology incorporated into their everyday learning

practices. In my 30-year career as a classroom teacher and in my future plans as a coordinator of a

specialized program (maybe remediation), the utilizing of a variety of methods of instruction within a

single class period would impact positively on learning and allow students to experience a variety of

styles of learning while exploring different methods of interacting (collaboratively, independently, and in

a small group instruction setup). Since I have witnessed and have read of the benefits of such an

innovative style, I believe my career could take on new directions as today’s students participate in the

variety and dynamics this style offers to enhance achievement.

Reference

Headden, S. (2013). The Promise of Personalized Learning. Education Next, 13(4), 14-20.