The document discusses eight strategies for replicating the benefits of one-to-one tutoring in blended learning courses. The strategies include: 1) improving instructional materials by increasing quantity of instruction and providing cues/explanations, 2) enhancing peer interactions through cooperative learning and establishing a supportive class environment, 3) considering student differences with tutorial instruction and feedback, and 4) engaging higher mental processes like metacognitive training and setting goals. Each strategy is explained and examples are given for how instructors can implement the strategies in blended learning courses.

1. Closing the 2-Sigma Gap
Eight Strategies to Replicate
One-to-One Tutoring
in Blended Learning
David W. Denton
David A. Wicks
Vicki Eveland
Seattle Pacific University
Sloan Consortium Blended Learning Conference, 2013

2. Closing the 2 Sigma Gap

3. Definitions
(Bloom, 1984)

4. Effects
(Bloom, 1984)

5. How can instructors replicate
characteristics of one-to-one tutoring in
blended learning courses?
Variables for Consideration
Improving instructional materials
Enhancing peer interactions
Considering student differences
Engaging higher mental processes

6. Eight Strategies
Improving instructional materials
1 Quantity of Instruction
2 Cues and Explanations
Enhancing peer interactions
3 Cooperative Learning
4 Class Environment
Considering student differences
5 Tutorial Instruction
6 Feedback
Engaging higher mental processes
7 Metacognitive Training
8 Goals

7. Improving Instructional Materials
1 Quantity of instruction
2 Cues and explanations

8. 1 Quantity of Instruction
The amount of guidance, preparation, & coaching provided to students in a course
Blended learning offers the opportunity for increased quantity of instruction
Better practices
Concise organization of materials, management
Differentiate between online and face-to-face components
Realistic expectations regarding complexity of content
Accountability, feedback, and reflection
Metacognitive training
(Abdullah, 2012; Nissen & Tea, 2012)

9. Improving Quantity of Instruction
Online resources showing what or how
Face time to coach students through application
Linking students to additional resources
Access to review material for particularly challenging content
Providing resources and instruction for a student to access at convenience

10. 2 Cues and Explanations
Information or questions shared by instructor or
students to help scaffold understanding

11. Improving Cues and Explanations
Instructional decision-making tree
Face time to understand nonverbal
expressions
Asynchronous discussions to allow time
to reflect prior to responding
Web conference to understand nonverbal
expressions if face time isn't available
(Frey & Fisher, 2010)

12. Enhancing Peer Interactions
3 Cooperative learning
4 Class environment

13. 3 Cooperative Learning
Use of small groups so that students work
together to maximize their own and each others'
learning
(Johnson, Johnson, & Smith, 1991)

14. Cognitive Presence
(Rourke, Anderson, Garrison, & Archer, 2001)
Collaborate on
Deliverable
(Charter, Essay, or
Presentation)
Complete
Deliverable,
Reflect on process
Review
Collaborative
Script Questions
Post to Personal
Area, Outline
Collaborative
Response

15. Improving Cooperative Learning
1. Choose an appropriate small group project
2. Identify suitable collaborative tools
3. Incorporate a collaborative script
4. Organize the project with phases for major milestones
5. Include specific deadlines for individual and group work
6. Form homogenous or heterogeneous teams
7. Provide training for technology and collaboration techniques
8. Assess evidence of individual-group participation after each phase (process)
9. Request student reflection on collaborative process after each phase
10. Assess deliverables or products after each phase (product)
(Wicks, Lumpe, Denton, 2012)

16. 4 Class Environment
Communication
Characteristics of an Effective LMS
(Elias, 2010; Higgins et al., 2005)

17. Improving Communication through
LMS Organization
Equitable use
All content online
Simple and intuitive
Interface
Navigation
Tolerance for error
Edit posts
Resubmission
Instructional climate
Regular email contact
Individual consultation

18. Simple and Intuitive
Organize content
Labels

19. Considering Student Differences
5 Tutorial instruction
6 Feedback

20. 5 Tutorial Instruction
Individualized instruction that supports regular
classroom instruction

22. Improving Tutorial Instruction
Replace or enhance lectures with short, interactive online tutorials
Provide background material, example problems, problem-solving opportunities
Supply immediate automated feedback
Include face-to-face tutorials using PIM
(Garrison & Vaughan, 2011)

23. 6 Feedback
Information provided by an agent (e.g., teacher,
peer, book, parent, self, experience) regarding
aspects of one’s performance or understanding
(Hattie & Timperley 2007)

24. Characteristics of Effective Feedback
Performance criteria, direction for improving
Opportunity for corrections
Efficient, timely delivery
Customized
Developed

25. Improving Feedback
Developed
Conversational tone
Opening or closing comment
Support comments throughout
Avoids identifying same error
Beyond brief comments "good"
(McGrath, Taylor, & Pychyl, 2011)

26. Engaging Higher Mental Processes
7 Metacognitive training
8 Goals

27. 7 Metacognitive Training
Metacognition - engaging higher mental processes involves metacognitive
and cognitive dimensions
Metacognition focuses on the active participation of the individual in his or
her thinking process
(Stewart and Landine 1995)

28. Kinds of Metacognitive Knowledge
Strategy
Task
How, when, why, where to
apply strategy
Self
Learner awareness of
strengths and weaknesses

29. Improving Metacognitive Training
Students engaging in blended learning struggle with managing
time, prioritizing activities, and organizing learning materials so
they may need explicit training in all of the areas of
metacognitive knowledge
(Yang, 2012)

30. 8 Goals
Goal - the end toward which effort is directed
Outcome - something that follows as a result
Objective - an aim, goal, or end of action

31. Characteristics of Goals
Fact, idea, principle, capability, skill, concept,
technique, value, feeling
Specific
Self-assess
Evidence

32. Improving Goals
Reflective Writing
1. Citation of goal
2. Presentation of evidence
3. Assertion of evidence-competence
4. Summary of what was learned
5. Identification of future steps
(Guldberg & Pilkington, 2007)

33. Eight Strategies
Improving instructional materials
1 Quantity of Instruction
2 Cues and Explanations
Enhancing peer interactions
3 Cooperative Learning
4 Class Environment
Considering student differences
5 Tutorial Instruction
6 Feedback
Engaging higher mental processes
7 Metacognitive Training
8 Goals

34. References
Abdulla, D. (2012). Attitudes of college students enrolled in 2-year health care programs towards online learning. Computers & Education, 59(4), 1215-1223.
Bloom, B. (1984). The 2 sigma problem: The search for methods of group instruction as effective as one-to-one tutoring. Educational Researcher 13(6), 4-16.
Cowan, J. E. (2012). Strategies for developing a community of practice: Nine years of lessons learned in a hybrid technology education master's program. Techtrends,
56(1), 12-18.
Elisa, T. Universal instructional design principles for Moodle. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 11(2), 110-124.
Frey, N., & Fisher, D. (2010). Identifying instructional moves during guided learning. The Reading Teacher, 64(2)
Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2011). Blended Learning in Higher Education: Framework, Principles, and Guidelines. Wiley Publishing.
Guldberg, K. & Pilkington, R. (2007). Tutor roles in facilitating reflection on practice through online discussion. Educational Technology and Society 10(1), 61-72.
Hattie, J. & Timperley, N. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112. doi: 10.3102/003465430298487
Hew, K., & Cheung, W. (2012). Students' use of asynchronous voice discussion in a blended-learning environment: A study of two undergraduate classes. Electronic
Journal of E-Learning, 10(4), 360-367.
Higgins, S., et al. (2005). The impact of school environments: A literature review. The Centre for Learning and Teaching School of Education, Communication and
Language Science. University of Newcastle.
Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R. T., and Smith, K. A. (1991). Cooperative learning: Increasing college faculty instructional productivity. ASHE-ERIC Report on Higher
Education. Washington, DC: George Washington University.
Kim, J. (2012). A study on learners' perceptional typology and relationships among the learner's types, characteristics, and academic achievement in a blended e-
education environment. Computers & Education, 59(2), 304-315.
McGrath, A. L., Taylor, A., & Pychyl, T. A. (2011). Writing helpful feedback: The influence of feedback type on students’ perceptions and writing performance.
Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 2(2), 1-16.
Nissen, E., & Tea, E. (2012). Going blended: New challenges for second generation L2 tutors. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 25(2), 145-163.
Office of Educational Technology (2013). Expanding evidence approaches for learning in a digital world. United Stated Department of Education. Retrieved from
http://www.ed.gov/edblogs/technology/files/2012/12/Expanding_Evidence_Approaches_DRAFT.pdf
Rourke, L., Anderson, T. Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing social presence in asynchronous, text-based computer conferencing. Journal of Distance
Education, 14(3), 51-70.
Stewart, J., & Landine, J. (1995). Study skills from a metacognitive perspective. Guidance & Counseling, 11(1), 16-20.
Strauss, V. (September, 2012). Three fears about blended learning. The Washington Post.
Wicks, D., Lumpe, A., Denton, D. (2012). Ten Strategies to Enhance Collaborative Learning in an Online Course. 18th Annual Sloan-C International Conference on
Online Learning. Orlando, FL.
Wilson, G., & Randall, M. (2012). The implementation and evaluation of a new learning space: A pilot study. Research in Learning Technology, 20(2), 1-17.
Yang, Y. (2012). Blended learning for college students with English reading difficulties. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 25(5), 393-410.