Innovation and

eISSN 2524-8502

Table. 1.

Matrix representing the categories and stages in the blended learning adoption framework

Category Stage 1-awareness/exploration Stage 2-adoption/early implementation Stage 3-mature implementation/growth
Purpose Individual faculty/administrators informally identify specific blended learning benefits Administrators identify purposes to motivate institutional adoption of blended learning Administrative refinement of purposes for continued promotion and funding of blended learning
Advocacy Individual faculty and administrators informally advocate Blended learning formally approved and advocated by university administrators Formal blended learning advocacy by university administrators and departments/colleges
Implementation Individual faculty members implementing blended learning Administrators target implementation in high impact areas and among willing faculty Departments/colleges strategically facilitate wide-spread faculty implementation
Definition No uniform definition of blended learning proposed Initial definition of blended learning formally proposed Refined definition of blended learning formally adopted
Policy No uniform blended learning policy in place Tentative policies adopted and communicated to stakeholders, policies revised as needed Robust policies in place with little need for revision, high level of community awareness
Governance No official approval or implementation system Emerging structures primarily to regulate and approve blended learning courses Robust structures involving academic unit leaders for strategic decision making
Models No institutional models established Identifying and exploring blended learning Models General blended learning models encouraged not enforced
Scheduling No designation of blended learning courses as such in course registration/catalog system Efforts to designate blended learning courses in registration/catalog system Blended learning designations or modality metadata available in registration/catalog system
Evaluation No formal evaluations in place addressing blended learning outcomes Limited institutional evaluations addressing blended learning outcomes Evaluation data addressing blended learning outcomes systematically reviewed
Technical Primary focus on traditional classroom technological support Increased focus on blended learning/online technological support for faculty and students Well established technological support to address blended learning/online needs of all stakeholders
Pedagogical No course development process in place Experimentation and building of a formal course development process Robust course development process established and systematically promoted
Incentives No identified faculty incentive structure for implementation Exploration of faculty incentive structure for faculty training and course development Well-established faculty incentive structure for systematic training and implementation

Reproduced from the article of Graham et al. (2013, p. 7).

© Innovation and Education