Blended learning and flipping the classroom

EUA has published its second Occasional Paper on the topic of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs).
Authored by Michael Gaebel, Director of the Higher Education Policy Unit at EUA, it also looks in detail at a number of issues related to the development of MOOCs that are directly relevant for universities.
The full paper can be downloaded here.
Blended learning and flipping the classroom
MOOCs are also considered as a means for instruction in a “blended learning” mode.
There are good arguments for this approach. Research shows that students learn more through active learning (i.e. when they have assignments or discuss an issue) rather than through listening to lectures. Students listen to lectures more attentively if they have been given a problem or task to solve before the lecture. In this regard the structure that most MOOCs have – short lectures alternating with assignments and quizzes – seems to be ideal. Of course, one could also do this in a classroom, but it would be more difficult to ensure that all students participate: some might need longer to assimilate the content of the lecture, and prefer to listen to it again before doing the assignment. Another advantage is that teacher-student contact time usually used for lectures could be used differently, e.g. for discussions, experiments, project- and group-work, working with peers etc. This concept is referred to as flipping the classroom. It has been strongly advocated and demonstrated by Salman Khan, founder of the Khan Academy, in the context of school teaching. Teachers get time to work with students on an individual basis. This may be a good strategy provided that institutions have the physical infrastructure in place. Lecture halls are not particularly useful for anything but lectures, and student project groups might also need rooms to meet and work. Some teachers report that their students are actually quite happy listening to lectures, and this is also confirmed by research that proves that students – despite the fact that they learn more and better when they are active learning – prefer conventional lectures.
Another observation is that the discussion on innovating learning through MOOCs takes a rather exclusive focus on replacing lectures. This might give the impression that students are spending most of their study time in lectures; this is probably not the case in most European higher education institutions. The concept of “flipping the classroom” might not be so different from seminar style teaching, where students have to read books at home, and to prepare papers to be presented. If a MOOC is to replace or to supplement book reading, this might appear more animated and more appealing to some students. But it might not really solve the “one to many” problem because in blended learning at an institution only a relatively small number of learners could take part in the flipped classroom. But an advantage might be that a MOOC could serve a very diverse learning group, comprising students in the institution, in the classroom and at home, and learners outside of the institution, whether or not they will take a certificate or be awarded credits in the end. The concept of a flipped classroom is of course not a particularity of MOOCs, but is used generally by institutions working with blended learning. The question is whether MOOCs are the most suitable instruments for blended learning, as they seem to be developed for self-study, and not as a part of a blended course. Therefore, teachers may use elements of a MOOC, both for classroom teaching or for home self-study assignment. However, this is only possible if MOOCs will prove to be sustainable and remain an open source. Download the full paper here.