Blended Learning in India: Are Teachers in India Ready to Go Blended?
The Internet has become an integral part of everyday life. It has changed every other field but the education system. It is more so in India (Wise & Rothman, 2010). In spite of being the seventh-largest country and having the largest child population in the world, India is nowhere in the picture as far as Blended Learning is concerned (Michael Barbour, 2006). With its innumerable problems such as lack of infrastructure, insufficiently trained teachers, high teacher absenteeism and lack of teachers’ accountability and motivation, the education system in India has poor learning outcomes (Mitra, 2010). In this scenario, Blended Learning appears to be promising for both private and government schools.
Education in India
India has two types of schools: Government schools run by the Government and Private Schools managed by private bodies like private trusts, societies or companies. The private schools are either aided or unaided depending on whether they receive any financial support from the Government (Vishwanath, 2013). While the State Government schools follow the syllabus prescribed by the State Government, the private schools follow a variety of syllabi depending on the board they are affiliated to like local state government. While most small private schools follow either State or Central syllabi, catering to the needs of the lower to a middle class, the International schools cater to the upper class. However, many schools call themselves International schools and there is no way to differentiate them from other schools (Sharma, 2011).
Despite of their varied affiliations, the private schools are more efficient compared to the Government schools in the quality of education and learning outcome as they are accountable to the parents and have to survive the rigorous competition (Kremer, Brannen, & Glennerster, 2013) (Kingdom, 2007). The notion that private schools are the choice of the rich is fallacious as 33% of children below the poverty line are attending private schools (Kingdom, 2007). Consequently, the percentage of children attending private schools is increasing gradually year by year and it is estimated that by the year 2018, 50% of children in India would be attending private schools (ASER, 2012).
The major development in the Indian education system is the implementation of the R.T.E. (Right to Education) act in 2010, which successfully improved the quantity in education but failed to provide quality learning. The ASER (Annual Status of Education Survey) has revealed a shocking truth that 41.1% of Fifth Standard students in Government Schools are unable to read a second standard textbook while 74.1% of them are unable to do a simple division (ASER, 2013). At the international level too the learning outcome is pathetic. In the study conducted by The Project for International Student Assessment (PISA), India was, placed a deplorable 72nd and 73rd rank among the 74 countries that participated. This pitiful score reflects the status of the Indian education system and the urgency for its improvement.
The recent ASER report indicates that learning outcomes are not only low but also decreasing since 2010, which marks the introduction of the Right to Education act (ASER, 2013).
Reasons for low standards in education
- The RTE act was responsible for the increase in the number of children enrolling in government schools but did not increase the number of teachers (Verma, 2012). As a result, the Pupil-Teacher-Ratio increased from 38:9 in 2010 to 42:8 in the year 2012 (ASER, 2012). The private schools are also in the same position, as they have to allot 25% of the seats for the government-paid students. This increase in students per teacher ratio in turn decreased the effectiveness of teaching and learning.
- The second reason is the lack of accountability among the teachers (Ramachandran, 2005). In government Schools, the RTE act has led to less effective teaching, as all exams and assessments have been scrapped; the understanding is that no child has to be left behind. The teachers are more interested in procedures and completion of the portions, thus drifting away from the main objectives of teaching and learning (Chavan, 2012). The situation is not any different in private schools. The teachers are accountable only for completing the portions and making the students score a high percentage in the exams. There is a strong lack of professional integrity among teachers. According to one student from a private school, even though he always scored 90 + in all subjects, he was not confident of solving a simple problem by himself. The reason was that the teachers wrote the answers to questions on the blackboard without explaining how to actually do them. A very distressing fact! However, those who did copy were very happy as they scored high marks, thus making both parents and management satisfied.
- Teacher absenteeism fuels the problem. It was found that 22.8% of teachers in private schools are absent compared to 20.1% in government schools. Among those present, only 48.5% were engaged and involved in teaching activity (Kremer M. C., 2005).
- The fourth reason is the increasing attrition rate among teachers. The rate of teachers leaving their jobs has increased over the last 15 years. It is estimated that 50% of new teachers leave their profession within five years of their teaching in the United States (Governor B, 2010). The picture is not very different in India. 53% of the schools in India have a higher Pupil-Teacher-Ratio because of the non-availability of teachers. 12 lakh teaching posts are vacant in Government schools at present. It is expected to increase to 20 lakhs by 2015. A generation ago teaching was considered to be an attractive profession with at least some of the best students opting for teaching posts. But now with increased job opportunities across sectors, teaching has become the last option (Verma, 2012, April 29). While the shortage of teachers has led the Government schools to appoint untrained, under-paid, Para-teachers and Contract teachers, private schools to appoint untrained teachers and provide in-service training. The administrators lament that there is no guarantee that those teachers would stick to the job. The growing rate of private tuitions contributes to teachers’ attrition rate as they are paid much more in private tuitions than they earn in one year while teaching in a school as a teacher (Express News Service, 2013), (Mukherji, 2013).
- The fifth reason is the low effectiveness standards of the teachers. Although teacher-effectiveness is a key factor in student’s achievement, there is a dearth of skilled teachers (Wise & Rothman, 2010). The number of experienced teachers is gradually decreasing, particularly in India. Studies indicate that there is a dearth of skilled teachers and most teachers lack the ability and skills needed to teach either language or math in primary grades (Bhattacharjea, 2011). In addition, 40-45% of teachers are ‘indifferent and really do not care about their job’ (Ramachandran, 2005).
- The sixth reason is that the children nowadays are different from the children of a generation ago. Neither the teaching techniques nor the teaching materials cater to the needs of the changing generation. The schools are still using materials that were developed for the students a decade or two ago (McCully, 2009). Alvin Toffler had warned that our schools are pacing backwards, following the old Industry-type mass education and insisted that we need to follow a new system and a new curriculum, which would better suit the future society, in which the children have to live (Toffler, 1972, p. 400). The only way of making education more future-oriented is by including technology in the classroom. Hence the educationists are insisting teachers and the heads of the institutions use technology as much as possible in the classrooms. However, they are not sure of how to go about it. As Kenndy and others say, merely providing hi-tech tools will not make education any better either (2013), (Bhattacharya & Sharma, 2007).
On the other hand, reviving the educational system is not the responsibility of only an education board, State or Central Government or Social or Economic leaders, but of all citizens. As Nilekani rightly points out, although the stakeholders are aware of the issue, they are not able to bring about any change in education (Nilekani, 2009).
While the government schools lack infrastructure, human resources and timeliness of implementation of policy, the Private Schools appear to be more open to integrating innovative ideas and experimentation. They are therefore promising. They are open to innovation and have already embraced technology in their classrooms in the form of Smart Boards, prerecorded Educational audio and video CDs. The International Schools have gone one step ahead and insisting students to get their iPads, laptops and smartphones to the classrooms (Vishwanath, 2013). Even the smaller schools are issuing tablets in place of textbooks. However many researchers oppose the use of these ‘high-tech tools’ merely as electronic textbooks (Kennedy, 2013) (Wise, 2010) (Carlson, 2002) (Jethro, 2012). Governor Bob Wise mocks that these ‘high-tech tools appear to be in a nineteenth-century model education system’ and argues that ‘technology should not be used as an add-on tool but as an integral part of the total educational environment’. He insists, that ‘the technology and Internet have to be used more actively for ‘research and original source documents, real-time chats with experts, social networking with peers around the globe, simulations etc.’ (2010). Nevertheless, this is possible only when teaching becomes more pragmatic and involves the students in learning.
Online Learning
The International Association for K-12 Online Learning (iNACOL) defines Online Learning as education where content and instruction are delivered primarily over the Internet (Heather & Horn, 2012). Online learning could be –
- Asynchronous learning – where learning happens at different times through emails, online discussion forums, message boards, blogs, podcasts etc.; or
- Synchronous learning – where the participants interact at the same time at the same place such as Tele Conferencing and
- Blended Learning – which combines face-to-face learning and online learning (Michael Barbour, 2006).
Studies indicate that Online Learning has many advantages over traditional teaching methods such as providing drills and practice, motivation to continue learning, making the abstract concept and thinking visible along with reinforcing the subjects taught by the human instructors (Hurme & Javela, 2005), (Wu & Hiltz, 2004), (Academic Partnerships, 2011) (Dowell, 2011). Apart from enhancing learning, online learning increases the learner’s satisfaction (Jethro, 2012) making learning possible “any time, any place, any path, any pace” (TaxWatch, 2007). It is also a boon for those who cannot attend school because of health issues and restrictions in mobility (Michael Barbour, 2006). Most importantly online learning is cost-effective, as it saves the expenditure on infrastructure (Kulik, 1991). Despite these advantages, Online Learning lacks the personal touch of a real teacher, which is very essential in K-12 classes (Carlson, 2002). Therefore a combination of online learning and face-to-face learning, which is termed Blended Learning, is becoming increasingly popular throughout the world.
Status of Online Learning in India
In spite of its technological growth, only 0.2% of schools in India have computers and even these schools use computers just to provide ‘computer education’ for their children (Bhattacharya & Sharma, 2007). In the survey conducted by the North American Council for Online Learning (NACOL) in 2006, India was nowhere in the picture of online education in K – 12 education (Powell, 2006). However, higher education was already into e-learning and many Universities like Jadavpur University, BITS Pilani Virtual University, Online education with Hughes, Visvesvaraya Technological University, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, DOECC Society etc. had their e-learning portals as early as 2006. Later on in 2011, in the second survey conducted by NACOL, India was yet to use online learning for K-12 students and it was found that only private tutoring institutes were using online learning as a supplemental education for K – 12 students. In contrast, India’s competitor China had created its first online school as early as 1996, which was increased to 200 online schools with a total student enrolment of 600,000. It was estimated that around 26% of the total student population were into online learning in China (Barbour, et al., 2006).
This indifference to Online learning in India is because many find it is extravagant when the basic needs like education, healthcare, drinking water and electricity are not met. Indians are also sceptical about technology as it might replace teachers (Bhattacharya & Sharma, 2007). In answer to this question, Bhattacharya quotes Bill Gates and affirms that ‘online learning is just a tool and should or will never replace a teacher’ (2007, p. 49). In this scenario, Blended Learning appears to provide a smooth transition from face-to-face, traditional learning to online learning (Bhattacharya & Sharma, 2007) as it is the combination of both. Accordingly,
Blended Learning
Christen, Staker and Horn, describe Blended Learning as a disruptive Innovation, a hybrid of brick and mortar learning and Online Learning (2013). The Clayton Christensen Institute defines Blended Learning as ‘a formal education program in which a student learns at least partly through online delivery of content and instruction with some element of student control over time, place, path and/or pace and partly at a supervised brick-and-mortar location away from home’ (Heather & Horn, 2012). The learning takes place partly online and partly in brick-and-mortar schools with face-to-face instruction, hence the name Blended Learning. There are three basic models of Blended learning – the Station Rotation model, Lab Rotation model and Flex model. In the Station Rotation model, the students are divided into three or four groups. Each group rotates between face-to-face instruction with the teacher, group-collaborative learning and online learning, within the classroom, at a fixed time; whereas in the Lab Rotation model the whole class goes to a computer lab for accessing online learning at and for a fixed period of time while in Flex model the instruction is primarily offered online. The teachers provide face-to-face support when needed (Heather & Horn, 2012). There are also other models like the Self-blend model, where children choose one or more online courses as a supplement to the traditional school syllabus; Online Deliver Model, in which most of the teaching is online with the optional or required element of face-to-face meetings with the instructors (Tucker, 2012).
Blended Learning proves to be a solution for many problems in the present-day education system. As Wise and Rothman point out, it resolves the global requirement of skill among the students and the teacher shortage issue, it is economical and it doesn’t require a huge investment (Wise & Rothman, 2010). It can improve the learning outcome by providing the stimulation and motivation required by the present generation. It also enables the student to learn “Any Time, Any Place, Any Path, Any Pace” and provides the drilling needed.
As Blended Learning is a supplement to the learning in a Brick and Mortar school, a student who does not understand a particular concept at school can always access the same lesson through the Internet at home. It also helps shy students who are apprehensive about asking questions in front of the whole class since they have the option of clearing their doubts with the teacher online without disclosing their names. Blended Learning provides a personalized learning experience as each student feels that the teacher is speaking only to him.
It is evident from the schools following Blended Learning that Blended Learning makes the students take ownership for their learning unlike in general set up, where the students come to school, do their homework or write their exams because of the parents and teachers (Greenberg, Schwartz, & Horn, 2013).
Blended Learning facilitates the teachers to spend more time on enhancing their lessons and providing extra help for the students rather than doing clerical works. Although preparing lessons and teaching online is time-intensive, the teachers enjoy it because for many reasons: the flexibility of ‘anyplace, anytime teacher’, and the provision for professional growth and quality of interaction with students, which is higher compared to the classroom discussion (Mayadas, Bourne, & Bacsich, 2009). It resolves the issues of teacher motivation and teacher absenteeism. Most importantly the skill of efficient teachers could be shared across the schools (Kulik & Kulik, 1991).
Moreover Blended Learning reduces the students’ boredom as once a concept is mastered they can move on to a new concept instead of waiting for the teacher’s further instruction. At the same time, those who have not understood can remain with the teachers for some help.
In addition, Blended learning’s futuristic approach caters to the needs of the present technology-savvy generation. Thus Blended Learning appears to be a solution for many of the problems in Indian education. However, implementing Blended Learning has many issues and challenges such as lack of access to the Internet, technology, tools and resources of online learning, and lack of understanding of online learning among teachers. It is essential for the teachers to have the technical knowledge and the new methodology to be adapted (Barbour, et al., 2006). Nevertheless, the countries practising Blended Learning have emphasized that teachers need not have special technical training other than the teaching training they already possess. However, this cannot be applied to the teachers in India.
The general conception is that the teachers in India are little exposed to computers and the B.Ed. the training they take is outdated. As the principal of a reputed Teacher Training College in Bengaluru pointed out, ‘Most Teacher Training Institutes provide the very mediocre amount of technical training, sufficient to open and close a document.’ Despite the in-service training provided by the schools, the teachers are far from being computer literate. The current research studies the computer literacy of teachers in Bengaluru.
Method and Data Collection
As Online Learning is getting more and more popular, and education boards are insisting on technology-based learning (Gohain, 2013) (Kremer, Brannen, & Glennerster, 2013), the current study is intended to evaluate the possibility of adapting Blended Learning in schools. Since the teachers are directly involved in the teaching-learning process they are the first ones to get affected. Although the teachers in international schools have already been using the Internet in their administration and regular teaching-learning, the teachers in the small private schools are not much exposed to computers. The current research intends to study the computer literacy of small private school teachers and their access to computers. A Survey Research with a convenience sampling method was used to collect the data. 650 questionnaires were distributed among the teachers of the Private aided and unaided schools in the Bengaluru Urban District, teaching the classes from pre-primary to 10th standard. Both male and female teachers participated in the survey. The Questionnaire included questions related to the age, qualification and teacher training; computer and Internet accessibility and usage; attitude towards using and not using computers; use of Smart Boards in their schools; and suggestions for improving the computer usage. 615 completed questionnaires were returned. Apart from the teachers the school principals and headteachers were interviewed.
Results and Analysis
The current study confirms that the number of people getting into teaching 1st to 10th standard is decreasing. The number of teachers in the age group of 21-29 was only half of the number of teachers in the age groups 30-39 and 40 – 40. The percentage of teachers in the age group 50-59 is also less compared to 30-39 and 40-49 year age group. This shows that more than fifty per cent of teachers leave the teaching profession once they cross 50 years of age. This predicts an acute shortage of teachers in the coming years.
The shortage of teachers has been already affecting the schools as the schools were appointing untrained teachers. This also explains the reason for the highest percentage of teachers (around 42.86%) without any teaching degree is in the age group 21-29 years. Teaching is no longer an attractive career proposition for the younger generation; therefore the rationale for implementing Blended Learning in India becomes all the more desirable.
The study indicates a strong correlation between age and computer skills – the younger the teachers the better are their computer skills. It was also observed that 43.81% of teachers in the age group 21-29, and 20.1% of 30-39 years age group, had learnt computer skills in their school days as a subject, and this explains why the two younger age groups are more comfortable with computers and have higher computer skills compared to the older age groups. In addition, a large percentage of teachers in the age groups 21-29 and 30-39 years, reported having attended a short-term computer course, on their own interest compared to the older teachers who were trained by the schools they are working with.
The older age groups, despite having access to computers (82.61% and 83.53%) and having been provided with training without any personal investment, have lower computer skills compared to the younger generation. Thus computers at home did not guarantee higher computer skills. Furthermore, the request for more training came more from the higher age group. Compared to 8.7% and 18.92% of teachers who requested more training in the age groups 21-29 and 30-39 respectively, 24.56% and 26.03% of teachers in the age group 40-49 and 50-59 years have expressed the need for more training.
Although they complained about lack of training and time, the teachers, preferred user-friendly software to a computer assistant who could do their computer-related work is a positive sign.
It is also evident that Blended Learning cannot be followed with the present national curriculum, which uses technology as a mere tool. As Wise and Rothman point out, the curriculum should rise beyond the use of tablets and iPads as electronic textbooks (2010) and the role of a teacher should be transformed from that of a mere preacher to a more active instructor and mentor. This reduces the burden on the teachers to keep records and enables them to be more effective and creative, teaching and learning assistants. In order to implement this kind of ‘High-Quality Blended Learning,’ the teachers have to utilize more pragmatic ways of teaching like discussion and project methods. This also allows the teachers to spend time economically and efficiently with the children who are in need instead of supervising the whole class. The students take responsibility and ownership for mastering skills instead of merely mugging up and regurgitating the answers (Greenberg, Schwartz, & Horn, 2013).
It is significant from the study that the teachers do have access to computers at home and school and they do have the basic skills for using computers and the Internet. Therefore the hypothesis that ‘the teachers in India are not ready for Blended Learning’ is rejected.
Conclusion and Future Study
The younger generation is eager and enthusiastic to bring about change in the education system. They are more comfortable with computers and enthusiastic about taking the education system a step ahead. It is also evident from the study that the total percentage of teachers and the percentage of skilled teachers are decreasing in India leading to a serious crisis, which might occur in the coming decade. Further, as Bhattacharya and Kunal point out, in order to prepare the present generation for the Digital Age it is imperative for India to adopt Blended Learning instead of getting into Online Learning (Bhattacharya & Sharma, 2007).
Although the teachers have basic computer and Internet skills, a very small percentage of teachers are using computers for creating audio and video lessons other than downloading the prepared supplementary aids from YouTube. Thus the teachers are not yet aware of the Internet portals and tools which could be used for discussion and creating effective lessons. Further study regarding the availability of Internet-education-portals and the ways to adapt them in the teaching and learning process is suggested. A study regarding the adaptation of Blended Learning and possible change in curriculum and its delivery is suggested.
Works Cited
Academic Partnerships. (2011). Research on the Effectiveness of Online Learning – A Compilation of Research on Online Learning. Dellas: Academic Partnerships.
Aggarwal, R. A. (2013). Secondary School Mathematic For Class 9. (6, Ed.) New Delhi: Bharati Bhavan Publishers and Distributers.
Annual Status of Education Report. (2012). Annual Status of Education Report 2012. Pratham. New Delhi: ASER Centre.
Annual Status of Education Report. (2013). Annual Status of Education Report 2013. Pratham. New Delhi: ASER Centre.
Bhattacharjea, S. W. (2011). Inside Primary Schools. Pratham Mumbai Education Initiative. Mumbai: Pratham.
Brian Greenberg, R. S. (2013, October 26). Blended Learning: Personalizing Education for Students. (M. Horn, Interviewer) United States: Coursera.
Carjul, N. (2008, July 1). Is Google Making Us Stupid? Retrieved October 20, 2013, from The Atlantic: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/07/is-google-making-us-stupid/306868/
Carlson, S. (2002, December). The Missing Link in Educational Technology. TechKnowlegia , 7-11.
Chavan, M. (2012). Uphill battle ahead as outsomes go downhill … Annual Status of Education Report. New Delhi: Pratham.
Clayton M. Christensen, M. B. (2013). Is K -12 Blended Learning Disruptive? An Introduction of the theory of hybrids . Clayton Christensen Institute. California: Clayton Christensen Institute.
Florida Taxwatch Center for Educational Performance and Accountability. (2007). Final Report: A comprehensive assessment of Florida Virtual School. Florida: Florida Taxwatch.
Gohain, M. P. (2013, July 21). Online learning course for 11m CBSE students. Times of India .
Governor Bob Wise, R. R. (2010). The online learning imperative: a solution to three looming crises in education. Alliance for Excellent Education. Washington D.C: Alliance for Excellent Education.
InfoChangeIndia. (2007, June). Status of Children in India. Retrieved September 29, 2013, from Infochangeindia: http://infochangeindia.org/agenda/child-rights-in-india/status-of-children-in-india.html
International Association for K-12 Online Learning. (2011). The Online Learning Definitions Project. Washington D.C: nternational Association for K-12 Online Learning.
Jethro, O. O. (2012). E-learning and its effects on teaching and learning in a global age. Indian J. Edu. Inf. Manage. , 1 (2), 73-78.
Kennedy, B. S. (2013). Why Blended Learning Can ‘ t Stand Still :. Arlington: Lexington Institute.
Khan, S. (2012). The One World School House – Education Reimagined. New York: Twelve.
Kingdom, G. (2007). The progress of school education in India. Oxford Review of Economic Policy , 23 (2), 168-195.
Kingdon, G. (2007). Public private partnerships in education: some policy questions. Cambridge: Research consoritium on educational outcomes and poverty.
Kremer, M. C. (2005). Teacher Absence in India: A Snapshot. Journal of the European Economic Association , 3 (2), 658-667.
Kulik, C.-L. C. (1991). Effectiveness of computer-based instruction: An updated analysis. Computers in Human Behavior , 7 (1-2), 75-94.
Kulik, C.-L. C. (1991). Effectiveness of computer-based instruction: An updated analysis. Computers in Human Behavior , 7 (1-2), 75-94.
McCully, T. L. (2009). The New Media Consortium and the Consortium for School Networking. eSkills Learning. North Corolina: eSkills Learning.
Michael Barbour, R. B. (2006). Online and Blended Learning: A survey of policy and practice of K-12 schools around teh world. International Association for K-12 Online Learning. Vienna: iNACOL.
Mitra, S. (2010). The child-driven education. TED Talks. Palo Alto, San Fransisco, USA: TED Conferences.
Nilekani, N. (2009, March 30). Idias for India’s future. TED Talks . Palo Alto, San Fransisco, USA: TED Conferences.
Pandey, N. (2013, March 11). Problems with school education in India. Retrieved September 27, 2013, from India Education Review.com: http://www.indiaeducationreview.com/article/problems-school-education-india
Ramachandran, V. P. (2005). Teacher Motivation in India. Brighton, U.K.
Sahlberg, P. (2013). How to build globally competitive education system with a collaborative learning culture. XSEED Solving a school leader’s dilemma. Bengaluru: XSEED.
Sean Kennedy, D. S. (2013). Why Blended Learning Can ‘ t Stand Still : A Commitment to Constant Innovation is Needed to Realize the Potential of Individualized Learning. Arlington: Lexington Institute.
Smith, L. (n.d.). Effectiveness of Computers in Education. (U. o. Department of Psychology, Producer) Retrieved September 29, 2013, from Educational Technology: http://sitemaker.umich.edu/lem.smith/effectiveness_of_computers_in_education
Staker Heather, M. B. (2012). Classifying K – 12 Blended Learning. Innosightinstitute. San Mateo: Innosightinstitute.
TaxWatch. (2007). Final Report: A comprehensive Assessment of Florida Virtual School. Retrieved September 29, 2013, from Florida TaxWatch: http://www.floridataxwatch.org/resources/pdf/110507FinalReportFLVS.pdf
The Times of India. (2011, April 30). International Schools: Syllabus offered by these Institues yet to be recogised In India. The Times of India .
Toffler, A. (1971). Future Shock. New York: Bantam House.
Tucker, C. R. (2012). Blended Learning in Grades 4 – 12. California, USA: Corwin a Sage Company.
Verma, S. (2012, April 29). But where have all the teachers gone? The Telegraph , pp. 10-13.
Vishwanath, A. N. (2013, May 31). Schools encouraging students to bring gadgets. The Times of India . Bengaluru, Karnataka, India.
Wu, D. H. (2004). PREDICTING LEARNING FROM ASYNCHRONOUS ONLINE DISCUSSIONS. JALN , 8 (2), 139-152.
Zhao, Y. B. (2003). Can Teacher Technology Integration Training Alone Lead to High Levels of Technology Integration ? A Qualitative Look at Teachers ’ Technology Integration after State Mandated Technology Training. Electronic Journal for the Integration of TEchnology in Education, 5, 53-62.
Find Graphs and Charts here