You are here:

Exploring Blended Learning to Enhance Biology Instruction—Instructional Design and Implementation
PROCEEDINGS

, , Gallaudet University, United States

E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, in Montréal, Quebec, Canada ISBN 978-1-880094-98-3 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), San Diego, CA

Full Text

Abstract

Instruction of STEM content for deaf and hard of hearing (DHH) students has been ineffective using traditional one-pace-fits-all classroom instruction and signed lectures. Factors adversely affecting learning include a general lack of prior scientific content knowledge among learners, scarcity of learning labs to replicate real-world environment, communication difficulties caused by a lack of a universal signing standard and extensive use of fingerspelling in signed lectures, and a significant diversity in learner capability. Through an iterative process, we explored a blended learning model to intervene and used a multiple-case and multiple-year study to investigate its effectiveness. At E-Learn 2010 international conference, we presented part one of the study (in-progress then) focusing on the literature review and the research design. In this paper, we report the design and implementation of the blended instructional model and present findings and recommendations.

Citation

Wang, Q. & Solomon, C. (2012). Exploring Blended Learning to Enhance Biology Instruction—Instructional Design and Implementation. In T. Bastiaens & G. Marks (Eds.), Proceedings of E-Learn 2012--World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 1 (pp. 1344-1353). Montréal, Quebec, Canada: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved March 2, 2021 from .

© 2012 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Creswell, J.W. (2008). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
  2. Driscoll, M. (2000). Psychology of learning for instruction (2nd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
  3. Feden, P.D., & Vogel, R.M. (2002) Methods of teaching: Applying cognitive science to promote student learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  4. Fraenkel, J.R., & Wallen, N.E. (2006). How to design and evaluate research in education (6th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
  5. Franks, P. (2002). Blended learning: What is it? How does it impact student retention and performance? World Conference on E-Learning inCorporate, Government, Healthcare, & Higher Education. 2002(1), 1477-1480.
  6. Gallaudet University. (2008). Office of Institutional Research Report.
  7. Kumar, K.L. (2002). Science and technology courses via e-Learning: An African scenario with lessons from SouthEast Asia. International Journal on E-Learning, 1(3), 65-70.
  8. Marschark, M. & Hauser, P. (2008). Cognitive underpinnings of learning by deaf and hard-of-hearing students: Differences, diversity, and directions. In M. Marschark & P.C. Hauser (Eds.), Deaf cognition: Foundations and outcomes (pp.3-23). New York: Oxford University Press.
  9. Marschark, M. & Wauters, L. (2008). Language comprehension and learning by deaf students. In M. Marschark & P.C. Hauser (Eds.), Deaf cognition: Foundations and outcomes (pp. 309-350). New York: Oxford University
  10. Pelz, J.B., Marschark, M., & Covertino, C. (2008) Visual Gaze as a Marker of Deaf Students' Attention During Mediated Instruction. In M. Marschark & P.C. Hauser (Eds.), Deaf cognition: Foundations and outcomes (pp. 264-285). New York: Oxford University Press.
  11. Sancho, P., Corral, R., Rivas, T., González, M.J., Chordi, A., & Tejedor, C. (2006). Instructional design and assessment: A blended learning experience for teaching microbiology. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 70(5).
  12. Schunk, D. (2004). Learning theories: An educational perspective (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
  13. Seal, B.C. (2004). Psychological testing of sign language interpreters. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 9(1), 39-52.
  14. Singleton, J.L., & Tittle, M.D. (2000). Deaf parents and their hearing children. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 5(3), 221-236.
  15. The Joint Information Systems Committee. (2004). Effective practice with e-Learning: A good practice guide in designing for learning. Retrieved August 20, 2010, from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/ACF5D0.pdf
  16. The Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools. (2001). Report to the faculty, administrators, trustees, staff,
  17. Turkington, C., & Sussman, A.E. (2004). The encyclopedia of deafness and hearing disorders (2nd ed. Updated). New York: Facts On File, Inc.
  18. Valiathan, P. (2002). Blended learning models. Retrieved August 20, 2010, from http://www.astd.org/LC/2002/0802_valiathan.htm
  19. Wang, Q (2006). Blending electronic and classroom teaching to support deaf and hard of hearing college students. Dissertation Abstract International, DAI-A 67/06. (UMI No. 3221288).
  20. Wang, Q. & Solomon, C. (2010). Exploring Blended Learning to Enhance Biology Instruction— Literature Review and Study Design. In J. Sanchez& K. Zhang (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning inCorporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2010 (pp. 2268-2277). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
  21. Wilbur, R.B. (2000). The use of ASL to support the development of English and literacy. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 5(1), 81-104.
  22. Yoon, S. & Lim, D. (2007). Strategic Blending: A Conceptual Framework to Improve Learning and Performance. International Journal on E-Learning. 6(3), 475-489. Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Also Read

Related Collections