Introduction
Behaviorism, constructivism, connectivity, and cognitivism lay the groundwork for learner-centered approaches. Teachers are expected to acknowledge learner differences and implement the appropriate learning strategies to meet their unique needs. This paper compares and contrasts blended learning, virtual learning, and modern classroom models. It also collates each of these models with traditional in-person instruction and evaluates which of these models is the best for the 21st-century student.
Description of the Instruction Models
Blended Learning
Blended learning is an integrated teaching approach that involves combining traditional teaching methods and e-learning. Braiana and Volchenkova (2016) described blended learning as a “method of teaching that combines the most effective face-to-face teaching techniques and online interactive collaboration” (p. 24). It is important to note that a traditional face-to-face program in which students use the internet for research is not blended learning. In blended learning, online classes complement instructor-led learning on campus. It requires instructor-student co-presence, with students having control over time and location.
The key advantages of blended learning include cost-effectiveness, pedagogical richness, low learning costs, and social interaction. Students can access class materials anywhere and at any time while enjoying the benefits of face-to-face learning (Braiana & Volchenkova, 2016). Students can watch lectures at their convenience, giving the student more autonomy in the learning process. Unlike traditional models that use unilateral teaching styles, blended learning combines various teaching approaches, which increases its pedagogical richness (Bryan & Volchenkova 2016). Its main weakness is that it can reduce learning access in regions characterized by the digital divide. It can also increase institutional costs when ICT infrastructure, maintenance, and technical support to learners’ costings are considered.
Virtual Learning
Virtual learning refers to the teaching approach where the teacher and student are separated. The whole program’s content is delivered online due to the physical distance between instructor and student. Asynchronous virtual learning is not real-time, i.e., the instructor provides students with a given timeframe to complete course assignments (Dhawan 2020). There is also a time difference in instructor-student communication. In contrast, synchronous communication and learning are done in real-time. Participants in synchronous interact through text, videos, audio chats, or webinars, allowing the course content to be delivered from a distance in real-time.
The key strengths include high flexibility, accessibility, and affordability. Students can access information and class material at their choosing. It reduces institutional and learner costs as it eliminates the need for transportation, accommodation, and institution-based learning. The fundamental weakness is that technical errors (downloading errors, audio and video issues, and login problems) can reduce learner experience (Dhawan 2020). Dhawan (2020) also reports that students find virtual learning boring and unengaging, given that there are limited practice opportunities. Instructors and students need some level of e-learning expertise and competencies for the program to be successful.
Modern Classroom
Modern classrooms harmoniously combine three elements: space, technology, and pedagogy. This model involves integrating technology into areas designed for teaching and learning (“Modern learning environment,” n.d.). The classroom will have connected devices such as tablets or notebooks, audiovisuals, and specially-designed furniture or collaborative workstations to allow students to learn in different styles.
The modern classroom’s main advantage is that it increases student engagement, motivation, social interaction, and commitment to student-centered education. Students have reported better grades and attendance from using the smart classrooms. The classrooms also boost creativity and participation (“Modern learning environment,” n.d.). Its fundamental weakness is that it is expensive due to the equipment installation and maintenance costs. It also requires special equipment and supplies and staff with specialized expertise to succeed, generating more institutional costs.
Comparison and Contrast Between Models
Charles Graham, an education technologist, classified blended learning into four dimensions. They include space (face-to-face vs. virtual); sensual richness (high vs. low senses & text only); humanness (high human, no machine vs. low human, high machine); and time (synchronous vs. asynchronous) (Bryan & Volchenkova 2016). These dimensions can be used to compare and contrast blended learning, virtual learning, and modern classrooms. Below is an in-depth comparison of the learning models using these dimensions.
Space and Time Dimension
Using technology as a delivery model, either in part or whole, is a shared characteristic between blended learning and virtual learning. Another similarity is that blended and virtual learning bridge time and space – students can access classes at their convenience regardless of their current locations. Students can access class materials anywhere and at any time because the class content is available online. While blended learning and modern classrooms use instructional technology to complement face-to-face learning, virtual learning completely replaces in-person learning. In the modern classroom, instructional resources like videos, articles, podcasts, etc., are used to enhance and enrich the face-to-face learning experiences. In blended learning, these online classes do not just improve in-person learning; instead, they complement them.
Humanness and Sensual Dimension
Virtual learning is characterized by low-human and high-machine relationships. Interaction between instructors and students is limited, especially in asynchronous teaching methods. Online exchanges are impersonal, and the instructor needs to implement appropriate learning activities to individualize learning for their students. Machines, including instructional technology, are highly involved in mediating the teaching and learning experience in virtual and blended learning. On the other hand, blended learning and modern classrooms have moderate high-human and moderate-machine relationships. In blending learning and modern classrooms, a physical co-presence between the instructor and students must mediate the learning experiences. Therefore, the instruction models are more inclined to face-to-face/physical interactions than virtual learning. The study conducted by Malasari et al. (2021) showed that blended learning allows students to have personal and engaging experiences by encouraging collaboration and social interaction. Blended learning, therefore, promotes interpersonal relations among learners, unlike virtual learning.
Learners in blended and modern classroom models can socially interact while the instructors guide meaning by providing students with one-on-one feedback. These interactions breed a strong sense of community than fully online classes (Malasari et al., 2021). The study also revealed that blended learning helps minimize distress and anxiety among students, implying that the system can promote students’ psychological well-being (Malasari et al., 2021). Therefore, it can be concluded that blended learning and modern classrooms are more human-centered, while virtual learning is impersonal. Another difference between the models relates to instructor-student interaction. In virtual learning, instructors’ presence is entirely virtual/online, and there is no physical interaction between them and students. In contrast, blended learning and modern classrooms have an individualistic element in them – instructors can tailor instructions to the student’s unique needs and preferences.
Comparing and Contrasting Each Model to the Traditional In-Person Instruction
Traditional in-person instruction is a method where course content is delivered in-person to a group of students. The approach involves a live/physical interaction between instructor and learner. Modern classrooms are more similar to the traditional instruction model than virtual and blended learning. Both the conventional in-person approach and contemporary classroom classes are entirely conducted on-site or on campus. The main difference between modern and traditional classrooms is that the former is typified by a digital element, while the latter does not. Modern classrooms are technology-enhanced with digital displays, whiteboards, assistive devices, and audio/visual components integrated into the classroom. On the other hand, traditional classrooms do not use these technologies in instruction. Another difference is that conventional learning is teacher-centered, while modern classrooms are learner-centric. In conventional settings, the teacher is the class’s central focus, while modern classrooms are technology-driven and learner-centric.
The main similarity between virtual learning and the traditional instruction model is that instructors design the classes. The instructors are responsible for developing teaching strategies and learning activities for students in both cases. Additionally, feedback between instructors and students is vital in enabling an effective learning environment. The models’ main difference is that all class interactions in virtual learning are done online, while class interactions in traditional settings are face-to-face. Additionally, time schedules in virtual learning are flexible: students can choose when and where to attend classes, but class schedules in traditional settings are fixed. Another differentiating feature is the group homogeneity in the classes. Traditional spaces have students with homogenous characteristics, i.e., most students will belong to the same age group or profession. Learning groups are heterogeneous in virtual classes because students are sourced globally via the web.
Blended learning and traditional learning are similar in that instructors and students can interact face-to-face. However, the face-to-face interactions in blended learning only happen part-time, while it’s full-time in traditional settings. Technology integration in the course program is the main differentiating feature between the two models. Blended learning is partly computer-mediated, i.e., students complement their face-to-face education with online learning, an absent element in the traditional instruction model.
The Best Model for the 21st-Century Student
With the fourth industrial revolution underway, the education system has to prepare students for such a workplace. While it is clear that there is a paradigm shift from the traditional education model, there seems to be contention between which modern instruction models are most effective. The study conducted by Al-Balas et al. (2020) showed that students are skeptical of virtual learning models. About 55.2% of the study’s participants doubted virtual learning would fully equip students with the necessary skills needed for the job market (Al-Balas et al., 2020, p. 4). The participants revealed that students’ attendance and commitment to the program would be low (Al-Balas et al. 2020). The minimal dedication and attendance can be attributed to the flexibility and freedom accorded to the students by the teaching model.
Blended learning seems to be the best model for 21st-century students. About 75.5% of study participants in Al-Balas et al.’s (2020) preferred the blended approach to the traditional and virtual learning classes (p. 4). Another study conducted by Polhun et al. (2021) also supported the notion that blended learning is superior to virtual learning. Computer-based learning cannot completely replace the traditional instruction delivery approach; instead, it can only complement it (Polhun et al., 2021). Blended learning combines the interactivity and communication benefits of face-to-face learning with flexibility, accessibility, and convenience provided by distance learning. Students have demonstrated that blended learning has a better capacity for enhancing students’ academic achievement than traditional models.
Conclusion
Blended learning combines face-to-face learning with e-learning, while virtual classes are entirely conducted online. In blended learning, online courses complement the in-person classes but ultimately replace the in-person classes in virtual courses. Blended learning is the best model suited for the traditional student because virtual classes cannot fully replace traditional classes. It combines the interactivity and communication benefits of face-to-face learning with flexibility, accessibility, and convenience provided by distance learning.
References
Al-Balas, M., Al-Balas, H. I., Jaber, H. M., Obeidat, K., Al-Balas, H., Aborajooh, E. A., Al-Taher, R., & Al-Balas, B. (2020). Distance learning in clinical medical education amid COVID-19 pandemic in Jordan: Current situation, challenges, and perspectives. BMC Medical Education, 20, 1–7. Web.
Bryan, A., & Volchenkova, K. N. (2016). Blended learning: Definition, models, use in higher education. Bulletin of the South Ural State University Series Education: Education Sciences, 8(2), 24–30. Web.
Dhawan, S. (2020). Online learning: A panacea in the time of COVID-19 crisis. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 49(1), 5–22. Web.
Malasari, S., Kurniawati, L. A., & Martanti, I. F. R. (2021). Students’ perceptions on the implementation of blended learning in English for Mathematics. Metathesis: Journal of English Language, Literature, and Teaching, 4(3), 292–305. Web.
Modern learning environment. (n.d.). K-12 Education. Web.
Polhun, K., Kramarenko, T., Maloivan, M., & Tomilina, A. (2021). Shift from blended learning to distance one during the lockdown period using Moodle: Test control of students’ academic achievement and analysis of its results. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1840(1), 1–16. Web.