This document discusses blended learning approaches for human service education. It defines blended learning as thoughtfully combining online and face-to-face learning. Three key aspects of human services knowledge are identified: social science concepts, clinical practice skills, and direct practice experience. The first is best suited for online delivery, while the latter two are usually face-to-face. The document reviews literature showing increasing adoption of online and blended learning in social work education, with no significant differences in student outcomes compared to traditional programs. It also explores possibilities for teaching practice skills virtually through simulations.

1. Blending learning for the
human services
Neil Ballantyne
Director
Learning Designs

2. Blended learning
“Blended learning is the thoughtful fusion of
face-to-face and online learning
experiences…such that the strengths of
each are blended into a unique learning
experience congruent with the context and
intended educational purpose.”
(Garrison & Vaughan, 2008, p5)

3. What’s in the
human services blend?
1. Social science knowledge
declarative knowledge – knowing about
2. Clinical practice knowledge
functioning knowledge – know how
3. Direct practice experience
the practicum or placement
The first is the most likely candidate for online
delivery
The second two are usually delivered F2F

4. Moving beyond technoscepticism
• The human services literature includes a strong element of techno-
scepticism and resistance to technology use in teaching and in
practice.
• Sometimes presented in the form of a manifesto for resistance
rather than a reasoned academic discussion of evidence
• See in particular: Kreuger & Stretch (2009); Kreuger & Stretch
(2000a); Kreuger & Stretch, (2000b), and for a more recent
example Vodde et al. (2010)
• However, social work is engaging with the emerging network
society (Ballantyne & LaMendola, 2011); and the use of distance
learning is increasing (e.g. Oliaro & Trotter, 2010; Vernon et al.
2009; Wilke & Vinton, 2006)

5. Distance education in social work:
current and emerging trends
Survey by US Council of SW Education
• 41% of BSW and 52% of MSW are delivering
distance courses
• Further 18% of BSW and 19% of MSW are
considering delivery
• 72% of BSW and 56% of MSW are using
Internet/web delivery
• 63% of BSW and 76% of MSW delivery is blended
• 14.5% of BSW and 20% BSW delivering practice
courses
(Vernon et al., 2009)

6. A comparison of on-campus and
distance social work education
• @Monash University, Australia
• Different demographics
– Off-campus students were older, had children,
working in social services, lived at a distance
• Both groups satisfied with programmes of study
• Distance students more satisfied with access to
staff
• Distance students less satisfied with distance as a
mode of study
• No significant difference in grades
(Oliaro & Trotter, 2010)

7. Evaluation of first web-based
advanced MSW programme
• @Florida State University, USA
• Demographic difference
– Distance students older and had more work
experience
• No significant difference in satisfaction or
grades
• Distance students score slightly lower in
relation to some Fieldwork Educator
ratings (Wilke & Vinton, 2006)

8. Human service educators are beginning to harness new ways of
teaching practice skills

9. Learning practice skills online
• Some exceptions to the rule that clinical practice skills ought to be
taught F2F
• Social work students in Canada and Scotland use multimedia case
studies in a blended problem-based learning environment
(Ballantyne & Knowles, 2007)
• Social work students – one group F2F and one online – develop
social work interview skills and video record interviews for
assessment (Ouellette et al., 2006)
• Social work students use web-based environment to learn skills in
couples therapy (Shibusawa et al., 2006)
• Online course as part of online MSW teaches clinical skills online
(Siebert & Spaulding-Givens, 2006)

10. We need new kinds of interactive learning…

11. (Anderson, T. , 2008)
…new ways of conceptualising interactivity

12. (Garrison & Anderson, 2003)
…and new ways of imagining community & presence

13. • The supply of quality placements
• The training and experience of practice educators
• Timely access to the right learning opportunities
The limitations of the practicum

14. A thought experiment
…the virtual practicum?
• It’s the year 2020
• For one hour each week practicum students (as as
an adjunct to their live practicum experience)
engage in an immersive VR simulation
• They work with real and simulated actors in virtual
scenarios linked to key learning outcomes
• Different cultures can be represented
• Skills are practiced and can be assessed
• The avatars pass the Turing Test
• Would this be an educationally toxic experience?

15. Image Credits
Slide 8
By: iriss.org.uk
CC License: Attribution-NonCommercial 2.0 Generic (CC BY-NC 2.0) |
URL: http://www.flickr.com/photos/openlx/5950636723/
Slide 10
By: Tadeeej
CC License: Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)
URL: http://www.flickr.com/photos/tadeeej/3228729514/
Slide 13
By: iriss.org.uk
CC License: Attribution-NonCommercial 2.0 Generic (CC BY-NC 2.0)
URL: http://www.flickr.com/photos/openlx/3697928772/