Hybrid Flexible Instruction: Exploring Faculty Preparedness
Keywords:Faculty, Faculty Preparedness, Online Teaching, HyFlex Instruction,
The aim of this investigation was to survey faculty members on their perceived level of preparedness to design and implement hybrid flexible (HyFlex) instruction. Participants included 121 full- and part-time faculty. Using an electronic survey, faculty members: a) rated their preparedness to engage on different HyFlex instruction competencies, b) shared which pedagogical strategies they felt prepared to use in this instructional modality, and c) listed the resources and support that they felt were needed to successfully implement their course. The results indicated that faculty members felt prepared to successfully engage in competencies related to HyFlex instruction that were significantly similar to competencies required for in-person instruction. However, they admitted to feeling less prepared to manage the intricacies that are unique to the HyFlex modality. Also, instructors believe a variety of pedagogical strategies can be integrated into HyFlex instruction; however, for those unfamiliar with this instructional modality, significant support and resources are needed before designing and implementing a course.
Angelone, L., Warner, Z., & Zydney, J.M. (2020). Optimizing the technological design of a blended synchronous learning environment. Online Learning, 24(3), 222-240. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v24i3.2180
Beatty, B. J. (2019). Hybrid-flexible course design. https://edtechbooks.org/HyFlex
Beatty, B. (2020). Can HyFlex options support students in the midst of uncertainty? Transforming Higher Ed.https://er.educause.edu/blogs/2020/5/can-hyflex-options-support-students-in-the-midst-of-uncertainty
Bell, J., Sawaya, S., & Cain, W. (2014). Synchromodal classes: Designing for shared learning experiences F2F and online students. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.14434/ijdl.v5i1.12657
Bourdeau, D., Griffith, K., Griffith, J., & Griffith, J. (2018). An investigation of the relationship between grades and learning mode in an English composition course. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 15(2).
Chakraborty, M., & Victor, S. (2004). Do's and don'ts of simultaneous instruction to on-campus and distance students via videoconferencing. Journal of Library Administration, 41(1-2), 97-112. https://doi.org/10.1300/J111v41n01_09
Creswell, J.W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage.
Gruenhagen, K., Mccracken, T., & True, J. (1999). Using distance education technologies for the supervision of student teachers in remote rural schools. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 18(3–4), 58–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/8756870599018003-407
Irvine, V. (2020). The landscape of merging modalities. EDUCAUSE Review, 4, pp. 40-58. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/10/the-landscape-of-merging-modalities
Kelly, K. (2020, May 7). COVID-19 planning for fall 2020: A closer look at hybrid-flexible course design. Phil on EdTech. https://philonedtech.com/covid-19-planning-for-fall-2020-a-closer-look-at-hybrid-flexible-course-design/
Martin, F. (2020). Examining faculty perception of their readiness to teach online. Online Learning, 23(3), p. 97-119.
Moore, M., Robinson, H., Sheffield, A., & Phillips, A. (2017). Mastering the blend: A professional development program for K-12 teachers. Journal of Online Learning Research, 3(2).
Park, Y., & Bonk, C. J. (2007). Is online life a breeze? A case study for promoting synchronous learning in a blended graduate course. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 3(3).
Popov, O. (2009). Teachers’ and students’ experiences of simultaneous teaching in an international distance and on-campus master's programme in engineering. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 10(3).
Rogers, P., Graham, C., Rasmussen, R., Campbell, J., & Ure, D. (2003). Blending face-to-face and distance learners in a synchronous class: Instructor and learner experiences. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 4(3).
Romero-Hall, E.J. & Vicentini, C. (2017). Examining distance learners in hybrid synchronous instruction: Successes and challenges. Online Learning, 21(4), pp. 141-157. http://dx.doi.org/10.24059/olj.v21i4.1258
Roseth, C., Akcaoglu, M., & Zellner, A. (2013). Blending synchronous face-to-face and computer-supported cooperative learning in a hybrid doctoral seminar. TechTrends, 57(3), 54-59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-013-0663-z
Ryu, J. & Boggs, G. (2016). Teachers’ perceptions about teaching multimodal composition: The case study of Korean English teachers at secondary schools. English Language Teaching, 9(6).
Stewart, A. R., Harlow, D. B., & DeBacco, K. (2011). Students’ experience of synchronous learning in distributed environments. Distance Education, 32(3), 357-381. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2011.610289
Szeto, E. (2015). Community of Inquiry as an instructional approach: What effects of teaching, social and cognitive presences are there in blended synchronous learning and teaching? Computers & Education, 81, 191-201. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.10.015
Tesch, R. (1990). Qualitative research: Analysis types and software tools. Falmer Press.
Wang, Q., Quek, C., & Hu, X. (2017). Designing and improving a blended synchronous learning environment: an educational design research. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(3).
As a condition of publication, the author agrees to apply the Creative Commons – Attribution International 4.0 (CC-BY) License to OLJ articles. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
This licence allows anyone to reproduce OLJ articles at no cost and without further permission as long as they attribute the author and the journal. This permission includes printing, sharing and other forms of distribution.
Author(s) hold copyright in their work, and retain publishing rights without restrictions