Combining Online and Face-to-Face Learning: Examining a Hybrid Massive Open Online Course Model for Teacher Professional Development

• In Event: 72.041 - Leveraging Massive Open Online Courses to Foster Teacher Professional Development

Abstract

In 2013, our instructional team launched its first professional development MOOC, which was targeted at practicing teachers serving students from non-English-speaking backgrounds while implementing the linguistically demanding Common Core State Standards. The purpose of the course was to help teachers look closely at student-to-student discourse and facilitate student engagement in the types of interactions required by the new standards.

Our pilot MOOC was successful in many ways; according to participants, it provided a novel and accessible professional development for many teachers implementing the new standards. We began to field requests from school districts whose instructional leaders took the original course to offer “hybrid” versions. These hybrid versions would allow districts to leverage both the affordances of the MOOC, such as its curriculum, materials and online community, and those of face-to-face professional learning communities (PLCs). Since recent literature has suggested that combining online and face-to-face instructional elements may be more effective than purely online instruction, possibly due to increased human interactivity, a hybrid model seemed appropriate and potentially more effective than our original MOOC model (Ferdig & Pytash, 2014; Harmon et al., 2012; Means et al., 2009).

The objective of this paper is thus to examine if and how these hybrid courses affected participant learning outcomes. During these courses, district-based instructional coaches worked on-the-ground with participants taking the MOOC to guide them in their development and capture emergent learning. In other words, our research question is: (How) did the hybrid model improve participants' experiences, outcomes, and applications of core concepts?

To examine this question, we employed a mixed-methods case study approach. Various types of quantitative and qualitative data (e.g., surveys, pre- and post- assessments, forum posts, assignments, peer evaluation scores, focus groups, etc.) were collected to facilitate detailed, layered, and complementary analyses. Our district partners also assisted in data collection by recording teaching sessions and conducting structured classroom observations. The types of analyses we employed depended on the shape of particular data sources; for example, statistical regression was used to evaluate survey responses and assessment scores while participants’ written interactions and recorded classroom observations were open-coded and analyzed.

We find that the participants embraced the hybrid model; the completion rates for participants in the hybrid format of the two courses were 99 percent and 84 percent, versus 26 percent and 44 percent for the full cohorts. The findings also suggest that the hybrid model offered a more supportive and integrated environment than the MOOC alone. For example, participants highlighted the linking of MOOC assignments with the face-to-face work of the PLCs, thereby enabling them “to get much more out of the course.” Finally, initial results suggest that learning outcomes were stronger for hybrid participants, particularly with respect to “discursive connoisseurship;” participants in the hybrid format demonstrated significant growth in in skills-based assessments and appeared to apply their learning to their classroom teaching even after course completion. This suggests that hybrid MOOCs are promising alternatives to current models of professional development, particularly for districts looking to expand teacher knowledge in specific areas.

Authors

• Sara Rutherford-Quach, Stanford University

• Lisa Zerkel, Stanford University

• Jeff Zwiers, Stanford University