Day two beings with the third keynote from Dr, Mark Nicols. He introduces 'Blendalogy: designing learning opportunities', a book just published as open access. Introduced International Council of Open and Distance Association( ICDE) and its objectives. Blendagogy came about through Mark's participation with the Commonwealth of Learning. A hui was held at the National Library early in 2026 and the chapters were workshopped, tightened and the book structured.
An overview of his involvement with blended learning - starting with a share material in the mid-1990s via the emergent WWW. He has now worked across many other programmes that are designed as blended learning. At the beginning, there was a steep learning curve and there was not much to guide the process. Although, technologies have moved on, the basic premise of blended learning are similar. Distance education is now flexible learning - open, inclusive and flexible. Teachers often have to work harder in blended learning. Almost everyone now practices some form of blended learning. Blended learning is not just an add on, but a more holistic system needs to support it. Blended learning includes bichronous, distance, hyflex and online.
Introduced the 4 objectives, 6 factors and 3 levels of Blendalogy. What should education models aim for? How de we describe educaitonal models? Which context should models be concerned with? Community of Inquiry model often used to anchor blended learning but application of the principles often challenging as the concepts can be difficult to define.
Summarised the art and science of design - the art (applying judgement, claiming your designer and teacher's voice, engagin ākonga, giving life to your subject, situating passion, releasing innovative ideas) and the science (align with your organisation, its context and efficacies, draw on evidence-based pracrice, optimise the four blendology objectives applying the 6 factors and across the 3 levels, recognise the constraints and opportunities).
Each of the objectives, factors and levels then presented, detailed and examples provided.
Objectives - ākonga facing acvailability & inclusivity), institution facing (scalability & sustainable),
Factors include ākonga activity, kaimahi activity, resources, assessment, timetable and success services. These factors help when comparing diffierent blended learning models.
Levels are the macro (institutional policies, central funding, budget, timetabling convventions etc.), meso (school, department, qualifications which define the programme, qualifications standards, workload and role expectations, assessment practices) and micro (direct teaching and learning, course level teaching activities, group dynamics, resource prepartation, day to day facilitation).
Shared some of the observations from across the case studies in the book. There are no 'frankencourses' in the book. ākonga may need support to engage in different ways to learn. To do blendology well - the institution needs to be deliberate; be curious about dynamics; seek alignment through sound meso-level practices and tailor success services to complement the model/s. Encouraged the need to blendology - to critique and validation the framework; a(synchronicity is a basic distinction and undertake thought experiments (how to optimise the macro and meso) and what is the perfect 'blend'? and AI??
Stressed the importance of planning/designing a blended course. Models are highly variable, may be compared, and best when carefully designed,
Following on I contribute to Mark's panel to support the launch of the Blendalogy book. The panel also includes Dr. Kathryn MacCullum and Trish Chaplin-Cheyne and is faciliated by Danny Friberg. Each contexturalised the framwork to their context and work. Danny introduced the speakers, along with an overview of how the panel will progress.
Mark began with providing more details of the book, how it evolved and his role as editor. Then each panelist contributed on how blendalogy works in their context, implementations and learnings. Mark wrote the introduction, under took the case study comparisons and summarised the findings in the concluding chapter.
Kathryn provided examples of blended learning from her career spanning the PTE, polytechnics and now the university (University of Canterbury). How does technology provide the opportunity to 'blend'. Blending should bring together the best of campus-based/f2f with distance/online etc.
I brought the VET context into the discussion. Especially the changes wrought by the recent reform of vocational education. Te Pukenga brought together the two strands of VET - work based (looked after by the industry training organisations (ITOs) and the polytechnics. Divorcing both work-based and campus based leads to lack of coordination, synchronisation and pedagogy. However, reversals of the reforms have caused both strands to separate again. However, ITOs are now shifting to become PTEs, so keeping the workplace-based learning and the off-job components consolidated.
Trish introduced the work of her unit, supporting teaching and learning across the institution. Looked at the books as a framework a a design model, and an evaluative model. The book provided a higher level and wider/broader macro and meso level implications on the micro practice. The post-graduate programme in learning design an example which meets many of the factors at the meso and micro levels but important to acknowledge the ākonga need for student success support.
Trish asked the question about the role of AI on Blendagogy. Mark considered that AI could be thought of in a similar way to the objectives, focus and levels withing the Blendagogy framework.
Q & A followed.
After lunch, I follow a few presentations before leaving for the airport and returning to Otautahi.
- "A motivaitonal ecology of gamified Guqin learning: visible progress, human support and cultural practice with Xin Huang from Manxuetang Research and Open Polytechnic. Began with the design mechanisms and how they become continued learning activity. How does learning can self-regulated be supported with gamification. Draws on gamified mechanisms, self-regulated practice and feedback, and situated participation and culture. There is a gap on how gamified visibility, self-regulated practice, feedback uptake and social participation interact. Demonstrated the gamified interface, what the learner sees and also what is 'beyond screen' - teacher feedback. Progress is visible as long horizon, intermediate target and practice log. Study on 21 learners across 42 days. Shared some of the quantitative learning analytics and qualitative data from wechat practice support group. Game currency encouraged engagement with practice. Gamified visibility makes practice and progress traceable. Findings include linking game elements to a concrete, learning relevant action. Make progress signals interpretable, actionable and timely. Design feedback uptake, only feedback delivery. Support social participation without making competition compulsory, Responsive human support useful. Proposed and presented a framework with purposeful learning and practice at the centre.
- 'navigating shifting student engagement in online secondary psychology' with Grant Collie. A practitioner reflection on NCEA 2 & 3 at Kōtui Ako virtual learning network. Provided a background and rationale for the study. Both synchronous and asynchronous with students from across the country. The course requires critical inquiry, human connection , and the discussion of human behaviour. In general, there is a progressive reluctance in 'live engagement amongst students. Passive observation, growing non-attendance and reluctance to engage in collaborative tasks expressed across student cohorts. Chat used for out of class catch up and not showing on video. However, there is something in this course which is different.
Literature on diagnosing digtal fatique shared - cognitive overload, social anxiety, digital equality are factors. Also the cognitive drain of hy-invisibility through prolonged screen exposure, absences of non-verbal cues, informaiton overlad and cognitive saturation and passitivity. Resulting a paadoxical state of hyper-visibility and extreme social isolation. Intersectig fatigue with the NCEA curriculum include research methodologies - collaborative design tasks fail when students refuse to unmute in breakout rooms. Individual behaviour with deep cognitive inquiry requires self regulation, destroyed by screen-induced cyberloafing; and psychological theories - debating ethics without discussion. Therefore teacher needs to change. Recommended, complete micro-task asynchronously, submit pre-reading reflection, log in live, apply theory to specific case studies with a result of targeted engagement. This moves learners from passive listening and open-ended forums. Pre-loading cognitive work mitigates live anxiety and anchors the synchronous session. Gamication is not about points, it operationises flow theory (Cskiszentmihalyi). Learners are incentivised. Modern online NCEA learner requires a highly intentional, highly engaging environment.
