Aviva S Chmiel1, Maya Shaha2, Daniel K Schneider3. 1. Institute of Higher Education and Research in Nursing (IUFRS), Switzerland. Electronic address: aviva.chmiel@gmail.com. 2. Institute of Higher Education and Research in Nursing (IUFRS), Switzerland. 3. University of Geneva, Switzerland.
Abstract
AIM: The aim of this research is to develop a comprehensive evaluation framework involving all actors in a higher education blended learning (BL) program. BACKGROUND: BL evaluation usually either focuses on students, faculty, technological or institutional aspects. Currently, no validated comprehensive monitoring tool exists that can support introduction and further implementation of BL in a higher education context. METHOD: Starting from established evaluation principles and standards, concepts that were to be evaluated were firstly identified and grouped. In a second step, related BL evaluation tools referring to students, faculty and institutional level were selected. This allowed setting up and implementing an evaluation framework to monitor the introduction of BL during two succeeding recurrences of the program. RESULTS: The results of the evaluation allowed documenting strengths and weaknesses of the BL format in a comprehensive way, involving all actors. It has led to improvements at program, faculty and course level. The evaluation process and the reporting of the results proved to be demanding in time and personal resources. CONCLUSION: The evaluation framework allows measuring the most significant dimensions influencing the success of a BL implementation at program level. However, this comprehensive evaluation is resource intensive. Further steps will be to refine the framework towards a sustainable and transferable BL monitoring tool that finds a balance between comprehensiveness and efficiency. Copyright Â
AIM: The aim of this research is to develop a comprehensive evaluation framework involving all actors in a higher education blended learning (BL) program. BACKGROUND: BL evaluation usually either focuses on students, faculty, technological or institutional aspects. Currently, no validated comprehensive monitoring tool exists that can support introduction and further implementation of BL in a higher education context. METHOD: Starting from established evaluation principles and standards, concepts that were to be evaluated were firstly identified and grouped. In a second step, related BL evaluation tools referring to students, faculty and institutional level were selected. This allowed setting up and implementing an evaluation framework to monitor the introduction of BL during two succeeding recurrences of the program. RESULTS: The results of the evaluation allowed documenting strengths and weaknesses of the BL format in a comprehensive way, involving all actors. It has led to improvements at program, faculty and course level. The evaluation process and the reporting of the results proved to be demanding in time and personal resources. CONCLUSION: The evaluation framework allows measuring the most significant dimensions influencing the success of a BL implementation at program level. However, this comprehensive evaluation is resource intensive. Further steps will be to refine the framework towards a sustainable and transferable BL monitoring tool that finds a balance between comprehensiveness and efficiency. Copyright Â