Knowledge dimension of the HybrIDD course
We understand the knowledge dimension to include characteristics that shape the design decisions on teaching formats, teaching-learning objectives, learning content and learning times in a hybrid course.
- We understand teaching-learning objectives as didactic goals that can be geared towards the acquisition of knowledge, skills or attitudes.
- Teaching formats include lectures, seminars and trainings, each of which has specific structural characteristics: While seminars are characterized as discursive and trainings as practical, lectures are suitable for introducing a large number of students to a subject area.
- In addition, it must be determined what is to be learned. To this end, knowledge must be prepared, structured, sequenced and made available to students as learning content.
- Finally, learning time must be taken into account. By this we mean, on the one hand, the time scheduled by lecturers for certain activities. On the other hand, we also understand that time experienced subjectively differently by individual students.
"Under the conditions of a hybrid-flexible organization of teaching and learning processes, professional action in [teaching] places great demands on situational action, but also on planning knowledge [...], which is particularly important for anticipating unforeseen events."
(Assinger & Gruber, 2022, S. 95-96, translated from German)
-
On the one hand, synchronous-hybrid teaching-learning settings require good didactic planning. After all, it is not only decisions on teaching formats, teaching-learning objectives or learning content that need to be made. It is also important to think carefully about how much interaction should be implemented in the synchronous-hybrid teaching-learning settings and which methods and social forms should be implemented translocally (i.e. jointly by online and on site participants). Reflexive questions (see “Materials for further use” below) can help with the detailed planning of individual sessions. On the other hand, a certain methodical and didactic flexibility is required to be able to respond to unforeseen circumstances. In synchronous-hybrid teaching-learning settings in particular, where students can decide from session to session how they want to participate (online or on site), the proportion of on-site or online participants can change from session to session. This in turn has an impact on didactic (im)possibilities, such as the implementation of group work, if only one person participates online. In this case, we recommend checking the respective participation mode (online or on site) before each session (see also “Materials for further use”).
-
As the hybrid implementation of courses is often unfamiliar to students at first, an introduction is required, for example in the form of training (see social setting), in the course of which the “downfalls” and advantages of synchronous-hybrid teaching-learning settings are discussed. When navigating through a synchronous-hybrid teaching-learning setting, it also helps students if the individual sessions follow a similar structure (e.g. always a welcome, then input, then group work, etc.) and “public didactics” is used overall, i.e. didactic decisions are justified by the lecturer.
-
A shared “place” (e.g. a learning platform) in which learning content, tasks or work assignments are made accessible to everyone is particularly recommended for translocal collaboration, for example in group work where online and on-site participants work together on a task. This reduces confusion and the feeling of being left alone, especially for online participants.
-
Finally, we found that it is important to address the different ways in which on site and online participants experience learning time. For example, online participants need more breaks to maintain their ability to concentrate or a didactic approach to physicality. The latter can take the form of “energizers” during breaks, for example, during which online participants have to get up and become physically active.
From lecturers for lecturers: Tips for designing synchronous-hybrid teaching-learning settings
We asked lecturers at the Professorship of Adult and Continuing Education what recommendations they would give other lecturers on the didactic and methodical design of synchronous-hybrid teaching and learning settings. This is what they answered:
In addition to the detailed planning of the lessons (planning of learning objectives, learning content, etc.), lecturers must make additional didactically motivated decisions that relate specifically to the hybrid delivery of the course. We have developed the following reflection questions to help with the planning:
| Objectives | What is the purpose of the hybrid delivery of the course? (e.g. creating access for care-working and chronically ill students or the promotion of internationality) |
| Schedule | How often and for how long (once, several times or over the entire semester) should the course be delivered in a hybrid mode? |
| Course size and composition of participants | How many students will take part in total, how many online and how many on site? |
| Persons involved | Will I be teaching alone or in tandem with a colleague? Is there someone who will support me with the media equipment (e.g. a student assistant)? |
| Places | From where do the participants (students, lecturers or external experts) take part? (e.g. from home, from another university, from abroad, etc.)? |
| Complexity of interaction | How much interaction should be made possible? Is it enough for me if the online participants just listen, or should they actively participate in what is happening? |
| Complexity of the media technology implementation | What media technology is available? How complex should the media technology setup be? |
| Degree of co-creation by the students | How can students be involved in the implementation of the hybrid course? |
As we found out that students also make their participation behavior dependent on that of other students, lecturers are adviced to create polls on the learning platform in time before each session, which are set up so that all course participants can view the results of the poll. Students then vote before each session on whether they would like to take part in the hybrid course online or on site. This voting also helps the lecturers, as they can adapt their didactic planning accordingly.
Breitschwerdt, L.; Hümmer, C. & Egetenmeyer, R. (2024). Gestaltungsanforderungen hybrider Settings in der Hochschullehre aus der Perspektive von Studierenden. Bildungsforschung. 30(1). https://doi.org/10.25539/bildungsforschung.v30i1.1029
Breitschwerdt, L.; Hümmer, C.; & Egetenmeyer, R. (angenommen). Umsetzung synchron-hybrider Settings an Hochschulen. Ein Erfahrungsbericht zur Ermöglichung ko-kreativer synchron-hybrider Lehr-Lern-Settings im Hochschulkontext. In Schmidt-Lauff S. (Hg.), (Transformative) Digitale Kompetenzen – Entwicklungen für Hochschule, Studium und Gesellschaft (S. NN). Wbv.
Foraster, M. J.; Egetenmeyer, R.; Soler-Gallart, M.; de Aguileta, A. L.; Flecha, R. (2023). Soler, Egetenmeyer, Lopez, Flecha (2023). Dialogic teaching beyond words. Multidisciplinary Journal of Educational Research, 13 (3), pp: 313 –324. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17583/remie.12867 In Citavi anzeigen
Hümmer, C.; Egetenmeyer, R.; Flecha, R. & Soler, M. (2024). Dialogisches Lehren jenseits von Worten – Forschungsergebnisse zu kommunikativen Handlungen in der hybriden Lehre. Erwachsenenbildung. Vierteljahresschrift für Theorie und Praxis. 70, 02, S. 68-71.
Hümmer, C.; Breitschwerdt, L.; & Egetenmeyer, R. (in preparation). Students' perspectives on the social organisation of international Hybrid Learning Spaces – a qualitative analysis.
Hümmer, C.; Egetenmeyer, R.; Breitschwerdt, L.; Oliver, E. (in preparation). Forms of Hybrid Learning Spaces in Higher Education - a qualitative analysis.
