Moving to Learner-Centered
Teaching: A Blended Learning
Approach
Joan Kaplowitz, Ph.D., MLIS – UCLA Librarian Emerita and
Instructor UCLA Department of Information Studies
Transform Your Teaching - www.joankaplowitz.com
joan@joankaplowitz.com
Hillary Kaplowitz, MS – Instructional Designer – California State
University Northridge
hillary.kaplowitz@csun.edu
ABSTRACT
This poster
 Describes the transformation of a face-to-face (F2F) graduate
course to a F2F/online blend utilizing a learning-centered teaching
(LCT) approach.
 Discusses the thinking behind the move to an LCT/blended approach.
 Outlines the steps necessary to accomplish this transformation.
 Highlights how LCT elements were incorporated into F2F classes.
 Shows how the course site supported the LCT approach.
 Includes a summary of lessons learned.
 Concludes that the collaborative learning community created through
this blend encouraged students to take more responsibility for their own
and their fellow students’ learning.
Step 1: Commit to the Idea:
Why LCT?




Empowers learners to take charge of their own learning.
Enables learners to develop the skills, attitudes, and
knowledge to become for life-long learners.
Encourages self-reflection and insight into own learning
and in the learning process itself.
Natural pairing with Information Literacy (IL)’s goal of
creating a nation of people who have learned how to learn.
Step 2: Commit to Philosophy:
CPR for Teaching - Collaboration,
Participation, Responsibility





Fundamental principle of LCT: Invite learners into the process.
LCT shifts balance of power from teacher to learner.
Teacher moves from merely transmitting information to a
more inclusive mode of teaching.
Learners viewed as active partners, not passive recipients.
Learners expected to work Collaboratively with teacher and
fellow learners, to actively Participate, and to take
Responsibility for their own and their fellow
learners accomplishments.
Step 3: Commit to Method:
Why Blended Instruction?



Blended instruction combines best practices of F2F and
online teaching.
Retains personal touch of F2F while taking advantage of
flexibility, collaboration opportunities, and extended
contact time offered by online instruction.
Provides enhanced possibilities for creating community
of learners through F2F and online interactions.
Step 4: Making the Transition:
Transforming UCLA’s IS 448






Information Literacy Instruction (IS 448) taught since
1990.
Heavy emphasis had been on F2F instruction.
IS department adoption of CMS (Moodle) allowed for shift
to blended approach.
Initially course site used only for posting of assignments
and weekly schedules.
Increased use of course site helped support move to LCT
and blended approach.
F2F meetings reduced to 8 out of possible 10 to balance
workload of online activities.
Step 5: What Happens in the F2F
Meetings?







Initial ice-breaker exercise to help students learn about each
other and begin to form learning community.
Brainstorming sessions in which students helped direct
structure and format of course.
Group work in which students applied what they had
learned.
Instructor lead exercises and discussions.
Open discussion time for student selected topics.
Guest speakers.
Individual teaching opportunity for each student.
Step 6: What Happens on Course
Site?







General course information, weekly schedule, assignments,
announcements etc. all distributed exclusively via site.
Selection of case study (course project).
Formation of teams to work on case.
Formation of teams to facilitate online discussions.
5 student-led online discussions on topics selected during first
F2F meeting.
Peer critique of first assignment (Memo to Administrator).
NOTE: Instructor also made extensive use of email to
individual students and teams to provide feedback as needed.
Step 7: What Worked?






LCT/blended approach increased participation, engagement,
and involvement in F2F meetings and on course site.
Course site as primary distribution vehicle for materialalways available and no paper handouts.
Online sharing and critiquing of Memo assignment – helped
everyone improve their case study projects.
Student led online discussions – thought-provoking and
insightful comments from all.
F2F meetings effective for team/community building and as a
place to try out and apply new knowledge.
Instructor able to monitor learning via Memo critiques and
online discussion comments as well as during F2F meetings.
Step 8: What Needs Tweaking?





Students need time to adjust to LCT. They are not always
happy with CPR aspects.
Course site – some aspects overly complex and need to be
simplified.
Online discussions – too many and peer grading
methodology used was cumbersome and too complex.
Open discussion periods - Students not prepared– very few
questions or issues raised.
Too many F2F sessions – need to reduce F2F meetings to
allow more time for online work.
Step 9: What’s Next?




Move to more blended approach – 60% F2F; 40%
online.
More sharing of assignments online.
Online activities need to be scheduled for the nonF2F meeting weeks.
Continued exploration of ways to incorporate more
LCT approaches to both F2F and online portions of
course.