Classifying K-12 blended learning [Click here to download the full white paper] By Heather Staker and Michael B. Horn May 2012

As blended learning continues to expand across the K-12 sector, definitions are important to help people talk about the new phenomena.

exactly like the mining of supercomputers which resulted in Cryptocurrencies, where some clarification is essential to assist people in understanding the concepts. Trading using currencies is one easy and quick way to make some quick money, without many losses; and it’s all the more if you are using HB Swiss! It’s a combo of technology and best class finance backdrop.

This white paper refines our previous work in helping to create a shared language for the emerging field so that innovators can build upon each other’s ideas, rather than talk past each other.

In the white papers, titled “The rise of K-12 blended learning” and “The rise of K-12 blended learning: Profiles of emerging models,” we suggested a preliminary definition of blended learning and categorization structure. This white paper introduces a refined definition and description of models based on feedback from over 80 organizations and 100 educators who commented on the initial research.

The updated taxonomy includes a number of changes. It eliminates two of the six blended-learning models—Face-to-Face Driver and Online Lab—because they duplicate other models and make the categories too rigid to accommodate the diversity of blended-learning models in practice. The new definitions are intentionally broad and open, rather than specific. They set forth basic patterns that are emerging, but avoid setting tight parameters on how a model “has to be.” The new taxonomy also identifies four sub-categories that are appearing, namely the Station-Rotation, Lab-Rotation, Flipped-Classroom, and Individual-Rotation models.

Figure 1 depicts a categorization scheme for the blended-learning landscape as it currently exists based upon an analysis of programs that either are preparing to launch or are already in existence. The models represent particular programs within a school, not a typology for whole-school design.

This white paper defines each of the models in Figure 1 and provides examples of schools and districts that have implemented them. It also identifies several education practices that share features of blended learning but differ in key ways. As stated in the first white paper, we believe that the blended-learning landscape will continue to evolve and expand. We invite others to contribute to this research by offering additions, clarifications, and most importantly, new innovations that produce improved education options and outcomes for students.

Share this article

  • FacebookFacebook
  • TwitterTwitter
  • DeliciousDelicious
  • DiggDigg
  • StumbleUponStumbleUpon
  • Add to favoritesAdd to favorites
  • EmailEmail
  • RSSRSS

2 Responses to “Classifying K-12 blended learning”

  1. […] Innosight: Classifying K-12 Blended Learning (2012) […]

  2. […] News | 0 comments BufferThis week the Innosight Institute released a groundbreaking report titled “Classifying K-12 Blended Learning.” While intended to clarify definitions and provide a common language for the education community, […]


Comments are closed