learning - Academic Conferences Limited

Arno Louw
somewhat an unwritten contract between the site user and the developer. There is a give and take in
the relationship.” The author adds that “... users are imperfect like everyone else; if we give them
complete control, they make serious errors. If you control things too much and the user notices that
they can’t resize their window or press certain buttons, they may become angry or frustrated.”
Moreover, the same author argues that “Users can do everything they need to do and nothing more.
People need to feel like they are in control but the control should have limits. Good interfaces exhibit
this control.”
4.2.3 The dimension of flexibility
The continuum of a learning program can be unchangeable or more learner accommodative.
Therefore, this dimension ranges between a teacher-proof programme to an easily modifiable
programme. A programme must make provision for changing content, adaptation to the immediate
need(s) of the learners as well as the design of activities that can be adapted according to changes in
the dynamic curriculum that might be influential to good classroom practice. Earle (2002) explains that
flexibility within an online environment refers to the customisability. She refers to Schatz who believes
that “we are on the verge of being able to provide learning customized for each specific learner at a
specific time, taking into account their learning style, experience, knowledge and learning goals.”
Moreover, the author focuses the discussion on flexible learning as to be the successor of
programmes designed to be flexible. She poses the following ten stipulations as to describe flexible
learning. In this regard, Earle (2002) further draws on Reigeluth (1999) and lists the inclusion
embedded in these values, as: authenticity, ownership, and relevance of the learning experience for
students; rich social contexts and multiple perspectives for learning... the critically of “what to teach”
and the considerable variability of “how to teach it”; learning that is driven by an ill-structured problem
(or question, case, project). The overseer of a workable pedagogy is the lecturer and therefore the
perception of the lecturer during the diffusion process is important.
4.3 Lecturers perception and expectations from blended learning
Bombarding lecturers with all that is said in this section is certainly overwhelming. Even more so,
considering the different generations and the rate of adoption, poses a challenge toward the process
of professional development. Systematically introducing lecturers to the blended learning approach,
integrated between F2F and online teaching in an LMS, caused just as much acceptance, resilience
and resistance. The acceptance of blended learning usually calls for immediate implementation. After
considering whether students should really be encouraged to bring cell phones to class, Orlando
(2011) says: “For one, students will eventually be entering the working world where these devices are
ubiquitous. Look at any business meeting and you will find everyone with smart phones or laptops.
The restriction on their use amounts to telling students that they need to go back to using pen and
paper for notetaking, like the 60’s. We are preparing students for a world that no longer exists.” He
pleads further that instead of “fighting the digital movement, try treating it as a collaborator in the
learning process and a way to get all of your students involved in class.” This positive perception
motivates older lecturers until the realisation, with the amount of planning for successful blended
learning, becomes certainty.
The LMS becomes more of an organisational tool. Lecturers all start to use the LMS for managing
groups of students. The following uses often occur when lecturers adopt using an LMS to extent their
F2F meetings:
Large classes receive class notes (mainly Power Point slides) after the lecture via the LMS to
ensure that students pay attention in class.
Announcements for venue changes, due dates, and quick arrangements are ensured to reach all
students.
The burden of checking for plagiarism in paper submissions becomes the responsibility of the
student.
Assignments can be submitted electronically via the LMS and hard copies do not get lost. A
proper submission record is also viable.
Assessments (usually tests) can be done online and record keeping is assured.
Statistical analysis of “activities” can deliver data for quick reports.
There is better control over class lists and group submissions.
428