A Model for the Study of Student Success in a Blended Learning Environment

Alan Dennis, Barbara Bichelmeyer, Dan Henry, Hasan Cakir, AN Korkmaz, Carol Watson, JoAnne Bunnage

ost of the recent innovation in secondary and higher education has been the result of the integration of digital technologies into the day-to-day work of school administration, teaching, and learning. The economic invest­ments required to provide schools with the hardware, software, and cabling that are necessary for Internet connectivity have created unprecedented school-cor­porate partnerships in the history of public education. The ability to develop and warehouse large databases has led to the development of national standards for education and computer-based assessment tools that allow the tracking of schools and students in their progress toward meeting those standards. The asynchronous nature of Internet communication has provided a powerful tool for the professional development of teachers, who have historically been re­stricted in learning opportunities by the constraint of the time they are required to spend in their own classrooms. The development of capabilities for trans­mitting video and audio through the Internet has led to Internet-based deliv­ery of instructional content that is the basis of virtual schools and degree programs that students can access from anyplace, eliminating the historical em­phasis on local control of schools and educational practices. Together, these de­velopments are leading to the blurring of traditional lines of distinction within education sectors and are forever changing the way that schooling and educa­tion are administered in the United States and around the world. We are living out an observation made by John Chambers, president and chief executive

The Cisco Networking Academy

officer of Cisco Systems, that the Internet is changing the way the world works, lives, plays, and learns (News@Cisco, 2004). /

Chambers is responsible for the creation and development of the Cisco Net­working Academy, a comprehensive blended learning program that provides students with Internet technology skills that are highly valued in the current global economy. The academy provides Web-based content, online assessment, and track­ing of student performance, as well as instructor training and support in order to prepare students for industry standard certification tests and careers in net­working and information technology.

Launched in October 1997 with sixty-four educational institutions in seven states, the Cisco Networking Academy is now operating in all states and more than 150 countries around the world. Over 400, 000 students have enrolled at more than ten thousand academies located in high schools, technical schools, colleges, universities, and community-based organizations.

The Cisco Networking Academy (CNA) is one example of how blended learn­ing is creating fundamental changes in the nature of public education.

Literature Review

The term blended learning is coming into common use in both business and acade­mic environments. The literature base for blended learning has its roots in dis­tance and online education. Theorists and practitioners have somewhat different perspectives regarding the various features of blended learning; however, both groups would likely agree that the essential nature of blended learning is the on­line delivery of instructional content with on-site implementation of instructional strategies. In corporate settings, blended learning is viewed generally as a com­bination of any possible instructional solution to a specific business problem (Bernnan, 2004; Thorne, 2003). In academic settings, blended learning has been specifically defined as the combination of the unique and good practices of face-to-face and online learning environments (Osguthorpe & Graham, 2003; Wonacott, 2002) rather than the use of any possible solution for instruction. Ostguthorpe and Graham (2003) also emphasize the use of the term blended learn­ing rather than hybrid learning because the term blended focuses on the harmonic and balanced combination of face-to-face and online learning environments.

Comparing Face-to-Face and Online Learning Environments

Various researchers have attempted to compare the effectiveness of online learning and face-to-face instruction. The research in this area seems inconclusive: there is

The Handbook of Blended Learning

no strong evidence that one type of learning environment is superior to the other in terms of student learning and satisfaction. Many studies conducted with different subjects and different class sizes have shown no significant differences in student learning outcomes and student satisfaction between online courses and conventional courses (Bolliger & Martindale, 2001; Johnson, Aragon, Shaik, & Palma-Rivas, 1999; Redding & Rotzien, 2001). In some cases, students in online classes demonstrated greater higher-order cognitive skills than students in traditional classes, but these dif­ferences were later attributed to student selection. Early research regarding the hypertext delivery format of online instruction found no significant difference in student learning between online and face-to-face learning environments (Dillon & Gabbard, 1998; Neuhauser, 2002; Shapiro & Niederhauser, 2004).

Unique Features of Face-to-Face and Online Learning Environments

When thinking of blended learning as a combination of the unique practices of face-to-face learning and online learning, it is helpful to consider the unique fea­tures of both environments.

Synchronicity versus Asynchronycity. One unique instructional feature of a face-to-face learning environment is that it provides direct, place-based, social inter­action between the student, the instructor, and other students. This direct, place-based social feature provides a synchronous mode of communication that fosters high motivation and engagement by allowing learners to test their under­standing immediately through interactions with instructors and peers.

While face-to-face learning is immediate, online learning is flexible. In online learning environments, course materials and messages between students and in­structors are available anywhere and anytime that the student has Internet access, which allows the student to study independently of time and space and to read mes­sages and send messages to the instructor and peers at the student's own convenience. In other words, the online learning environment provides flexibility to students by allowing them to access class materials, resources, and communications at any time and from any location that is convenient (and has an Internet connection).

Fidelity is also an aspect of asynchronicity and synchronicity that has impact on engagement and social presence in learning environments. Fidelity is a mea­sure of richness of communication; generally, synchronous environments such as face-to-face formats have very high fidelity, while asynchronous environments that are primarily audio and text based have very low fidelity.

Consistency versus Variability of Course Content. Every time an instructor pre­sents course content in a face-to-face learning environment, the presentation is in

The Cisco Networking Academy

some way unique. For example, time spent on a single point with one class of stu­dents is longer than the time spent on the same point with another class; the in­structor may forget a key example during a particular presentation; and students ask different questions that require emphasis on different content areas. There­fore, the content presented to students is never exactly the same between one sec­tion of a course and another section of the same course. The fact that course content varies easily (and informally) in a face-to-face learning environment means that there is little consistency in the presentation of curriculum content across several iterations of the course.

In the online learning environment, the quality of content is more likely to be consistent throughout all presentations of the material (Boyle, Bradley, Chalk, Jones, & Pickard, 2003) because the content is created and posted to the Web so that all students have access to the same materials throughout the course. Any cus­tomization of content is likely a deliberate decision by the instructor to provide different or additional materials for students.

An additional feature related to consistency in online learning environments is that when changes are made to the master resource in an online environment, those changes become immediately available to multiple remote sites.

Standardization versus Individualization of Course Activities. One drawback of face-to-face learning environments is that course activities in these environ­ments generally are one size fits all. In other words, what one student hears or ex­periences in a classroom presentation is generally what all students hear or experience in the classroom presentation. It is difficult (and perhaps impossible) for an instructor to individualize classroom activities so that the unique needs of twenty-five students are each sufficiently addressed during one class meeting. As a result, individual differences are difficult to address in face-to-face learning environments.

While face-to-face instruction does not adequately allow individualization of course activities, online learning can accommodate students who have differ­ent expertise levels, prefer different learning strategies, or are self-directed learn­ers. Individualization of course activities can be achieved using online delivery by providing learners with choices for learning activities that they can complete at their own pace.

Benefits of Blended Learning Environments

By bringing the unique features of online and face-to-face learning environments together, blended learning uses the best of both in order to address the different needs of students.

The Handbook of Blended Learning

Osguthorpe and Graham (2003) compiled the results of various case studies of blended learning in order to identify the benefits of blended learning envi­ronments; they include (1) pedagogical richness, (2) access to knowledge, (3) social interaction, (4) personal agency, (5) cost-effectiveness, and (6) ease of revision. The first four benefits have to do with possibilities for addressing different needs of learners in order to increase the learning output for all learners. Blended learn­ing creates a flexible environment in which students are engaged in their own learning experiences and in which social interactions between peers and teachers are unrestricted by time and location. Although Osguthorpe and Graham list cost-effectiveness as a benefit of blended learning, it is not necessarily true that on­line education costs less than face-to-face instruction (Milam, 2000). Nevertheless, one of the great benefits of blended learning in large-scale education initiatives (like the Cisco Networking Academy) is that they provide a centralized curricu­lum, which makes revisions easy for instructors since changes are required to only one source, while at the same time providing consistent quality for the content of instruction.

In a study examining Australian vocational education programs, researchers found that the combination of flexibility in online learning environments and the interaction between student and instructor in face-to face-learning environments is the most desired combination in blended learning (Cashion & Palmieri, 2002). While flexibility of the online environment allows learners to access and study the material at their convenience, students identify the immediate feedback and cor­rective action of teachers in face-to-face environments as the most desirable ele­ments of instruction.

One important caveat regarding learning in online environments is that while face-to-face instruction is a familiar and comfortable approach to learn­ing for almost all students and instructors, online learning does not appeal to everyone because it requires some basic level of technology knowledge, as well as the infrastructure to access the Internet and use it. Furthermore, the in­structional approaches used for online education are generally more appro­priate for individuals who are self-directed learners. The online learning experience can be frustrating, if not impossible, for those who do not have the appropriate prerequisite skills, resources, and attitudes to engage in it (Boyle et al, 2003).

Since blended learning is a new topic of research and practice, there are only a few studies about the effectiveness of these environments. Initial con­clusions from research conducted by Burgon and Williams (2003) and Boyle et al. (2003) suggest that student engagement and successful learning outcomes are increased for students in blended learning environments. However, much more

The Cisco Networking Academy 125

work needs to be completed in these areas before any conclusive findings will be
reached. /

The Cisco Networking Academy as a Blended Learning Environment

In the light of the definitions of blended learning presented earlier in this chap­ter, the Cisco Networking Academy may be viewed as a blended learning envi­ronment based on four key features of the academy: (1) centralized curriculum development, (2) online delivery of content, (3) on-site implementation of in­struction, and (4) standardized assessment of learners.

In the remainder of this chapter, we provide an overview of the Cisco Net­working Academy, describe in detail the four key features of the academy that characterize it as a blended learning environment, and propose a theoretical frame­work that may be used to study the effectiveness of the academy, as well as other blended learning environments.

The Cisco Networking Academy was originally developed by Cisco Systems in order to prepare high school and college students to pass the Cisco Network­ing Certification examination, a certification that provides individuals with op­portunities to take good-paying jobs with titles such as network engineer, network administrator, or information technology specialist. These positions are usually with solid, well-performing companies and may well lead the successful student to a career in the information technology sector.

Infrastructure of the Cisco Networking Academy

The programs and courses that are available from the Cisco Networking Acad­emy are all delivered over the Web from Cisco Learning Institute to partici­pating educational institutions, which include high schools, community colleges, technical schools, liberal arts colleges, universities, community organizations, and even a few middle schools. (Since its inception in 1997, the Cisco Learn­ing Institute, a public nonprofit corporation, has evolved from a support or­ganization into a key visionary and contributor to the Cisco Networking Academy Program and a recognized strategic partner to major nonprofits, nongovernmental organizations, governments, and commercial enterprises in advancing the effective use of technology in the process of teaching and learning.)

The Handbook of Blended Learning

The courses available through the academy are implemented on-site at the participating educational institution by program instructors. These instructors are generally the regular faculty of the school, who may be teaching courses in information technology, vocational education, computer science, math, English, or any other subject when they are not teaching Cisco Networking Academy courses. In order to teach academy courses, these instructors receive training through an implementation hierarchy that has been developed by Cisco Systems.

Cisco Systems staff have established relationships with approximately twenty educational institutions throughout the United States that serve as Cisco Acad­emy Training Centers (CATCs). Cisco staff provide training to the CATC fac­ulty regarding the curricular content, pedagogical approaches, resources, and materials of the Cisco Networking Academy programs, as well as information about updates to courses on an ongoing basis. In turn, each CATC is respon­sible for training and support of instructors at between ten and fifty regional training centers (RTCs), which are responsible for training and support of the instructors who teach students at local academies. Each RTC supports between five and fifty local academies, which are generally located near the RTCs that serve them. While the CATCS are the link between Cisco Systems and the par­ticipating educational institutions, the RTCs are the link between the CATCs and the local academies. RTC staff make annual visits to academies to ensure the quality of program implementation. In addition, they ensure that each in­structor completes sixteen hours of professional development each year. RTCs pass their information up to the CATCs, which are ultimately responsible for collecting data on quality assurance and best practices from the RTCs and local academies under them. (A CATC or RTC may also serve as a local academy, and most CATCs and RTCs offer CNA courses and teach directly to students.) Figure 9.1 is a graphical representation of the CNA hierarchical structure.

The Cisco Networking Academy offers programs and courses on topics such as networking, information technology, Web design, Java, and UNIX. The first and most popular program offered was the Cisco Certified Networking Associate (CCNA) program, which consists of four courses. Students who complete the four courses must pass a final exam at the end of each course; after they complete the program, they may register for and take a certification exam from a third-party assessment company that offers the examination independently of Cisco Systems.

Educational Components of the Cisco Networking Academy

The Cisco Networking Academy provides an interesting example of a blended learning environment that attempts to foster both accountability and meaningful

The Cisco Networking Academy