Scribd
Upload
0 views1 page

RRL

The document discusses the importance of institutional support and changes in teaching practices for the successful implementation of blended learning (BL) in higher education institutions (HEIs). It emphasizes the need for clear policies, organizational readiness, and effective communication among faculty, students, and administrators to motivate the application of BL. The authors propose that a supportive institutional environment positively influences instructors' motivation to adopt blended learning strategies.

Uploaded by

elizabethnceduc27
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0 views1 page

RRL

The document discusses the importance of institutional support and changes in teaching practices for the successful implementation of blended learning (BL) in higher education institutions (HEIs). It emphasizes the need for clear policies, organizational readiness, and effective communication among faculty, students, and administrators to motivate the application of BL. The authors propose that a supportive institutional environment positively influences instructors' motivation to adopt blended learning strategies.

Uploaded by

elizabethnceduc27
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

FOREIGN

Institutional environment
There is no doubt that the implementation of BL must go hand in hand with a change in
teaching practice, which affects many HEI’s core services, including content, learning
interactions, assessment, credentialing, and student support plus technology. These changes
demand that the role of instructors and students to be remodelled and learning responsibilities
renegotiated (Gibson et al., 2016). Institutional administration regarding strategic planning,
policy making or even substitute for incentive structures trigger the intention to blend
(Reid, 2014; Stacey & Gerbic, 2008). According to Benfield, Roberts, and Francis (2006),
models of BL are more likely to have less problems when they align with local institutional
needs. Organizational readiness to assist blended instruction (Buchanan, Sainter, &
Saunders, 2013) and systems of communication between students, faculty and administrators
(Tabor, 2007) are also deemed vital in influencing blending. Faculty shows concerns regarding
the administrative control of systems (Johnson, Wisniewski, Kuhlemeyer, Isaacs, &
Krzykowski, 2012) and the presence of institutional support (Buchanan et al., 2013; Calderon,
Ginsberg, & Ciabocchi, 2012; Reid, 2014). To make BL a success, there is an absolute need for
the school to have a clear and supportive institutional policy, leadership and practice towards the
idea of BL courses, as is reported to be under-represented in the BL literature according to
Johnson et al. (2016). Jones, Harvey, and Lefoe (2014) developed a conceptual framework by
identifying a space in which both academics and professionals can engage one another
collaboratively to trigger expertise, all to address the challenges of administrative concerns for
accountability and strategic intellect for blended courses. The presence of organizational
structure, strategy and support fuel the BL process together with the individual decision making
of instructors. While institutional decision making, strategy, structure and support encourages or
discourages BL application, decisions regarding infrastructure and institutional support were
found to be important motivators among the faculty members (Porter & Graham, 2015).
Accordingly, hypothesis three is proposed; The H3-institutional environment has a positive
effect on the motivation for applying blended learning.

Ibrahim, M. M., & Nat, M. (2019b). Blended learning motivation model for instructors in higher
education institutions. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher
Education, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0145-2

You might also like