Previous | Next

Fall 2023 · Vol. 52 No. 2 · pp. 128–137 

Online and Hybrid Pedagogy Practices: Honoring Christ in All We Do

Kurt McDonald

The recent global pandemic has had a profound impact on the world of education. Schools and teachers very quickly realized that they would have to move classroom instruction online. But the transition was easier for some than it was for others. Some schools and programs were already exploring the opportunities afforded by online learning technology before the pandemic and were therefore somewhat prepared for the change; others had to adapt quickly. Some flourished in this new remote work environment while others, students and teachers alike, found it frustrating. Now, with the pandemic mostly behind us and the world being opened up for on-site interactions again, educational institutions find themselves p. 129 continuing to navigate online and hybrid models of pedagogy. So, what is being done well and how is the technology improving?

Virtual pedagogy methods complement on-site methods; they are not meant to replace them.

The online world continues to have benefits for students and teachers. Current online practices such as discussions, dialogue posts, lectures, and even lounge/study time are enhanced with the latest technologies. Alternative methods of interaction are available, like augmented reality (AR), virtual reality (VR), e-portfolios, simulations, virtual tours of campus facilities and sites in distant corners of the world. History teachers can take their students to historical landmarks while STEM educators can simulate labs and equations in a virtual experience. As exciting as this technology already is, it remains in its infancy. While the online and hybrid worlds cannot replace traditional instruction, they can supplement it with engaging coursework that was not possible before. Combining existing pedagogical methods with the emerging world of virtual instruction will help teachers to reach their students in more engaging ways and help students enjoy new experiences that connect their education with life-like learning.

CHRISTIAN PEDAGOGY AND SERVANT TEACHING

In Christian higher education, of course, the servant-teaching component remains crucial. Christian educators do not just pass on information and critical academic skills; they also nurture the spiritual development of their students by modeling Christ to them. Online technologies may facilitate a spiritual mentoring relationship just by reducing some of the busy work in which both students and teachers find themselves stuck. But they may also improve the sense of community in a class by enabling robust classroom discussions and by giving teachers opportunities to get to know students better, much as they would if they were physically present to each other in a classroom.

Scripture tells us that when Jesus washed the feet of his disciples, he commanded them to go out and serve as he had served them. Although Jesus, being their teacher, could have demanded that they serve him, he demonstrated that leaders too must serve (John 13). The Christian calling is to serve. The pressing question today is, how might Christian educators best serve their students through online and hybrid pedagogical practices?

Christian service can take many forms. A teacher should be alert to students who appear to be less engaged in classes, perhaps because they are timid or because the technology intimidates them. While the more engaged and more technologically savvy students are easier to teach, others should not be neglected. In fact, to be a teacher like Jesus will often mean to pay special attention to those on the margins and at risk of being alienated from the educational experience. In some cases (but not all), these students will come from less well-to-do families or families p. 130 struggling with other hardships. To imitate Jesus in dealing with students will be manifested as recognizing all students as objects of God’s love and therefore worthy of loving respect and attention.

Christians are bestowed with gifts from God and are called to be good stewards of them (1 Peter 4:10). If their gift is teaching, then they should teach well (Rom 12:6–8). Taking time to learn about the opportunities available in the online environment will equip teachers with another tool that engages students and increases instructional efficacy.

Working in Christian higher education is a unique privilege. At their best, Christian educators will have a passion for excellent teaching and for providing their students with an excellent education. In this way, they will bring honor to Christ. In fact, they will regard teaching as a form of worship. 1 Christian educators will develop an ethos, entwining ethics and a hospitality that focuses on the interests and needs of their student guests. 2 Academic hospitality may be extended by a teacher to students but also by students to other students, giving the educational experience a communal dimension. Teacher and students together must practice intellectual hospitality in order to foster an invitational environment for learning. That is, knowledge must be given and received in a spirit of civility and reciprocity. 3 Hospitality involves a spatial presence, 4 and this creates a greater need for improved formats in online and hybrid environments.

The spatial presence available in the modern online world can create a campus for that hospitality and community. The more life-like options that virtual environments offer enable a deeper level of engagement than a Zoom session, yet they can have a Zoom-like effectiveness. Virtual classrooms offer an in-site screen like a Zoom session, but all the students sit in the room together, watching the video, much like an environment in a live scenario where the professor is showing a video on a screen to the class.

Of all the Christian values, love ranks as the highest (Matt 22:36–40). The Christian values that shape Christian pedagogy root the educational experience in love. 5 This will mean, at the very least, that Christian educational institutions must provide a learning environment that is reasonable and acceptable to both believers and non-believers. 6 Not, of course, in a manner that compromises Christ and the Christian mission but in a manner that honors academic civility. Academic discourse, then, should focus on the subject rather than on personal commitments and preferences; for students tend to disapprove when personal biases are at the forefront of instruction. 7 In an online setting, the prioritizing of the subject matter will resemble the practice in on-site instruction. When students and teachers meet in a virtual classroom that contains p. 131 a 360-degree spatial awareness, the resulting dialogue also simulates a life-like on-site engagement.

Online offerings often attempt to recreate on-site instruction with its discussions and community engagements and therefore make such events online written forums of some kind. Whether on-site or online, servant teachers must reduce unnecessarily “busywork” for themselves and for students. 8 The online solutions proposed in this article can help to reduce some busywork that exists in the current online format. For example, dialogue posts are used as a replacement for classroom discussion but are not as effective when students engage only with two posts, ignoring the rest of the discussion. Finding ways to better recreate the in-class and on-site facilitation would improve dialogue because it would more closely replicate the on-site classroom community.

VIRTUAL PEDAGOGY OPPORTUNITIES

The common methods for online pedagogy practices are working: virtual books, dialogue posts, live and prerecorded lectures, comments on assignments, a structure the students can follow, syllabi that are accurate to the coursework, and other methods like these. Yet, just as on-site practices have improved with technological developments, online pedagogy continues to improve as technology improves. Technology involving augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) enhances the virtual learning experience. Methods for online student engagement are more accessible for faculty and students than some might believe. Increasing student engagement with virtual classes is becoming less expensive and can offer training that simulates a classroom environment, such as labs or dialogic rooms with teachers and students, that is more lifelike.

One of the challenges with the online world in general is a lack of physical connection. Virtual environments cannot replicate physical presence. But there are cost-effective methods that help to close the gap between the real and the virtual. If community is allowed to wither (as it tends to in an ever-growing online world) harsh consequences can follow, like a numbness of spirit that makes us indifferent to strangers in need, and a preoccupation with ourselves often at the expense of the communal good. 9 The lack of deeper community in the online world deserves attention. People build communities in attempts to engage with one another better. Christian education has the opportunity to fulfill these needs for community through online and virtual workspaces.

We should note that virtual pedagogy methods complement on-site methods; they are not meant to replace them. Low-tech methods like discussions work well in conjunction with higher-tech methods. Instructors must teach from their strengths, 10 and technology can supplement those p. 132 strengths. Virtual environments improve online discussions, interaction in the classroom, simulated labs, and life-like engagement with lectures.

Some alternatives to video conferencing include virtual worlds, simulations, and e-portfolios. Professors need to do what they can to engage at higher levels. The pandemic that caused a surge of online activity demonstrated that upset, scared, or restless students significantly increased their activity with inappropriate, lustful online activity. 11 Although professors cannot be babysitters or supervisors, increasing engagement will help with some restless activities in the time the teacher has with the students. The interactivity could help alleviate some of the fear and anxiety that students might have regarding the coursework if they feel more connected with their professor.

How does the online world connect better with students? In 2005, Patricia Shea foresaw that the essential elements for student success were convenience, efficiency, and a student-centered focus. 12 She anticipated that online student service tools would require a blended environment: student autonomy combined with clean processes and reliable scheduling. Also mentioned was a customizable and personalized experience allowing students to plan classes and create a workspace that accommodates their needs. 13 While a digital-physical divide exists, emerging technology in online education serves to close some gaps that online/hybrid pedagogy has in comparison with on-site education. Some components, such as the spatial environment and sense of presence that people experience in on-site education, are difficult to replicate, but technology is making progress in that direction. Other learning opportunities, such as chemical labs, might actually be performed more safely in an online virtual lab than in a physical environment where mistakes can have serious consequences.

Another bonus is that students who cannot afford relocation or are physically or financially unable to live near a school (international students, for example) can still participate. 14 While online environments do not offer everything available in the physical setting, they do create opportunities for those who would otherwise have none. It might even benefit smaller schools unable to offer particular classes for a program they wish to offer. The expense of paying one instructor to teach a small class size of five might not be worth doing for one school, but a pool of schools that pays one adjunct professor to teach such small classes would benefit them all.

VIRTUAL WORLDS

Of the emerging online pedagogical methods, virtual worlds seem to hold the greatest promise. A virtual world is a space where people meet online. The idea is that it resembles a world to inhabit, ideally with spatial awareness. One such virtual world could be a classroom, where a student p. 133 can look around the room, see other students, see the teacher, and have a screen in the front of the room to view lecture slides, videos, and the like. Students would have avatars, which are characters they create to represent them in the virtual world. These avatars could be something resembling their life-like selves or even a fictitious creature; one could look like Shrek, depending on the limitations set by the virtual world moderators. Teachers could create a unique space, unlike a classroom but more like a café, if they wished to host the room in such a manner.

Virtual worlds bring a sense of physical presence in remote environments, helping students feel part of the school rather than distanced learners. Again, a virtual world does not replace on-site learning, but it does more closely bridge the gap between online engagement and physical engagement. Virtual worlds come in a few varieties: desktop monitors, augmented reality (AR), and virtual reality (VR), with VR offering the greatest level of immersion. 15 Desktop, with a typical monitor, is the least immersive because when one is just looking at a screen the sense of being in a different space is negligible. Examples of desktop virtual world platforms include Zoom, Teams, Skype, Blackboard, and Canvas. Augmented reality uses wide-angle lenses such as dome screens or AR glasses. They “enhance reality by adding computer-generated information to the real world,” 16 which creates more excitement and better holds the attention of viewers.

Virtual reality, however, creates a virtual world in a classroom with people or characters and the ability to look around the classroom as if the person is there. Virtual reality is currently accomplished using a VR headset. Some popular headsets include the Oculus Rift, HTC Vive, SteamVR with Valve Index, Meta Quest, and Google Cardboard. VR offers something similar to a physical location. Individuals utilizing VR can look around the room with 360-degree spatial awareness. Interactions enhance reality by adding computer-generated information to the real world. Simulations for STEM-related courses benefit from the simulation learning offered in VR environments. 17 History, theology, and geography instructors may take their students on a virtual tour of the location discussed for a lecture. Through enhanced virtual environments, more affordances for learning may occur. 18 Studies have shown that immersive VR experiences improve test scores due to higher engagement in the learning process compared with standard online protocols, including a massive open online course (MOOC, a class made for a large group), with visual learning scores being significantly higher. 19 Professors might help students make a deeper connection with the material as well. Using VR, students can visit The Holy City and explore Jerusalem in a well-crafted virtual experience. 20 p. 134 Professors will better connect their students to such geographically distant places by employing Google Expeditions or Google Earth.

VIRTUAL PEDAGOGY CHALLENGES AND SOLUTIONS

Some practical challenges that come with emerging technologies include technical interruptions. If an internet connection is dropped during assessments, 21 grading will be incomplete. Having just-in-time quizzes delivered to the student or teacher in a timely manner could pose a challenge. 22 A just-in-time quiz is one working between students and teachers that demonstrates learned class competencies and gives the teacher the flexibility to adjust the classroom content according to the needs of students. Finally, hardships in proper proctoring can occur. 23 Some of these challenges are a present reality, while others lie in the future as new technologies emerge.

For online and hybrid setups, it is up to each institution to explore solutions that will best serve our students’ academic goals. Research demonstrates improved scores and engagement with visual learning, specifically with STEM-type courses. 24 Some initial investment is required, but it may be more affordable than one might think considering the traditionally high cost of virtual reality devices. First, for those that are looking for international methodologies, COIL (collaborative online international learning) is a model specifically designed to facilitate internationalization by developing the cultural intelligence of students via cross-cultural interactions. 25 Students learn international communication skills without the cost of international travel. A virtual exchange “increases intercultural competence in terms of cultural intelligence.” 26 The COIL method is part of a virtual exchange, which is an umbrella term for an online technology tool focused on person-to-person interaction when the individuals are geographically remote from each other. 27

As for virtual reality, the most cost-effective method to get started is with Google Cardboard. With Google Cardboard, students use their smartphones as the VR device and order the cardboard headset for their phones on Amazon. Students may use the phones they already possess and use Google Cardboard to customize the head mount system to suit them best. 28 As mentioned earlier, the VR option provides location experiences that might prove too costly to experience on-site. Google Earth and Google Expeditions offer free and low-cost barriers of entry for faculty wishing to utilize the power of virtual reality. In partnership with Google Expeditions, colleges may offer virtual tours of the campus to help potential students experience the facility without having to travel across the country. And this could work well for coaches and recruiters alike. Several YouTube p. 135 videos demonstrate how Google Cardboard works, how cheap it is to start ($10 on Amazon), and how it is used in the world of education.

Virtual reality also provides instructors with a way to display research in an engaging manner where a Zoom meeting might fall short. Virtual lounges, a place for students to meet with each other and meet with their teachers, are open as well. Like a meeting at the campus coffee shop or in a professor’s office, a meeting in virtual space resembles a live dialogue better than a meeting in a two-dimensional environment.

Other software, such as VirtualSpeech, offers a classroom-simulated environment in VR that combines live Zoom-like environments with a virtual classroom for spatial environmental learning. Students may sit in a circle or face forward and have slides, presentations, videos, and simulcasts available within the virtual classroom. ClassVR is another option but focuses on secondary education and vocational courses. ClassVR can work well for dual-credit courses. For Criminal Justice programs, there is an option for police training called Lab for Applied Social Science Research.

CONCLUSION

As immersive technology continues to come down in price and simpler to use, education will benefit. What began as a necessity due to pandemic lockdowns has accelerated a trend toward engaging and immersive education technology. Immersive technology engages students better, creates opportunities for better learning, and improves students’ retention of information. Of the available virtual-world technologies—desktop, augmented reality, and virtual reality— virtual reality is the most immersive, providing students with opportunities to gather together with 360-degree spatial awareness. It also offers lab simulations, an improved atmosphere, and location tourism that dramatically improves the learning experience. The technology has reached a point where it is affordable for both students and educational institutions to run a trial at very little cost. Virtual worlds offer a great deal for those who would normally be hybrid or online students. The major obstacle is no longer the cost of startup but rather the learning anxiety that may be associated with the new technology.

Virtual options are not a replacement for on-site facilitation, but they offer benefits that are safer than real-world experiences and provide supplemental experiences to students who cannot be on-site. Online students can now be served better than ever with low-cost and effective emerging technologies. Christian educators committed to providing an excellent learning environment to students near and far will find that such technologies will make that commitment much easier to fulfill. p. 136

NOTES

  1. Quentin Schultze, Servant Teaching: Practice for Renewing Christian Higher Education (Grand Rapids, MI: Edenridge Press, 2022), chapter 2.
  2. Cf. Jacques Derrida, On Cosmopolitanism and Forgiveness (New York: Routledge, 2001).
  3. John B. Bennett, “The Academy of Hospitality,” CrossCurrents 50, no. 1/2 (Spring/Summer 2000): 25.
  4. Dan Bulley, “Ethics, Power and Space: International Hospitality beyond Derrida,” Hospitality and Society 5, no. 2 (2015): 185–201, https://pureadmin.qub.ac.uk/ws/portalfiles/portal/17482394/Bulley_Ethics_Power_and_Space_Hospitality_and_Society.pdf.
  5. Manfred L. Pirner, “Christian Pedagogy? A Research Report on the Christian Profile of an Educational Institution in Germany,” British Journal of Religious Education 35, no. 1 (2013): 72–86, https://doi.org/10.1080/01416200.2011.628198.
  6. Pirner, “Christian Pedagogy.”
  7. Pirner, “Christian Pedagogy.”
  8. Schultze, Servant Teaching, chapter 9.
  9. Calvin W. Redekop, “Christian Responsibility in a World of Change,” Direction 51, no. 1 (Spring 2022): 97.
  10. Schultze, Servant Teaching, chapter 16.
  11. Lorenzo Zamboni et al., “Covid-19 Lockdown: Impact on Online Gambling, Online Shopping, Web Navigation and Online Pornography,” Journal of Public Health Research 10, no. 1959 (January 2021), [2], https://doi.org/10.4081/jphr.2021.1759.
  12. Patricia A. Shea, “Serving Students Online: Enhancing Their Learning Experience,” New Directions for Student Services 112 (December 2005): 15.
  13. Shea, “Serving Students Online.”
  14. Melissa Laufer et al., “Digital Higher Education: A Divider or Bridge Builder? Leadership Perspectives on Edtech in a Covid-19 Reality,” International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education 18, no. 1 (2021): 1–17, https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00287-6.
  15. Anna Flavia Di Natale et al., “Immersive Virtual Reality in K-12 and Higher Education: A 10-Year Systematic Review of Empirical Research,” British Journal of Educational Technology 51, no. 6 (November 2020): 2006–33, https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13030.
  16. Di Natale et al., “Immersive Virtual Reality.”
  17. Di Natale et al., “Immersive Virtual Reality.”
  18. Di Natale et al., “Immersive Virtual Reality.”
  19. Supun Hewawalpita et al., “Effective Learning Content Offering in MOOCs with Virtual Reality: An Exploratory Study on Learner Experience,” Journal of Universal Computer Science 24, no. 2 (2018): 129–48.
  20. “The Holy City VR,” Holy City VR, Shanit, Nimrod, et al., http://www.holycityvr.com/.
  21. B. Means and J. Neisler, Unmasking Inequality: STEM Course Experience p. 137 during the COVID-19 Pandemic (2020): 13, https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED614284.pdf.
  22. Z. Chen, J. Jiao, and K. Hu, “Formative Assessment as an Online Instruction Intervention,” International Journal of Distance Education Technologies 19, no. 1 (2021): 50–65, https://doi.org/10.4018/IJDET.20210101.oa1.
  23. R. M. Cutri, J. Mena, and E. F. Whiting, “Faculty Readiness for Online Crisis Teaching: Transitioning to Online Teaching during the COVID-19 Pandemic,” European Journal of Teacher Education 43, no. 4 (2020): 523–41, https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2020.1815702.
  24. Di Natale et al., “Immersive Virtual Reality.”
  25. Simone Hackett et al., “The Effectiveness of Collaborative Online International Learning (COIL) on Intercultural Competence Development in Higher Education,” International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education 20, no. 5 (2023), https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-022-00373-3.
  26. Hackett et al., “Effectiveness of Collaborative Online International Learning.”
  27. Robert O’Dowd, “From Telecollaboration to Virtual Exchange: State-of-the-art and the Role of UNICollaboration in Moving Forward,” Journal of Virtual Exchange 1 (2018): 12, https://doi.org/10.14705/rpnet.2018.jve.1.
  28. Google Cardboard, http://arvr.google.com/cardboard/.
Kurt McDonald holds a doctorate in strategic leadership (DSL) from Regent University in Virginia Beach, Virginia. He is previously published in the Journal of Biblical Perspectives in Leadership and is now working on a chapter for a Palgrave-MacMillan book. Kurt plans to continue in an adjunct role at Tabor College while pursuing business opportunities with his wife.

Previous | Next