#1
Reference (APA):
Zhu, M., Sari, A., Lee, M. J. W., & So, H.-J. (2021). Effective instructional strategies and technology use in blended learning in a graduate course in the USA. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00264-z
Annotation
Summary:
This article presents a case study of a graduate-level blended learning course in the United States, examining both instructional strategies and the use of technology to support student engagement. The researchers identified strategies such as scaffolding, active learning, and timely feedback as particularly effective in blended contexts. The study also highlights how tools like learning management systems (LMS), discussion forums, and video conferencing platforms were integrated to bridge the gap between face-to-face and online components. Results showed that student perceptions of effectiveness were tied to how seamlessly instructional strategies and technologies were combined, rather than the tools themselves.
Evaluation:
The article’s strength lies in its practical relevance for higher education instructors who are actively designing blended and hybrid courses. Its case study approach provides rich qualitative insights that complement broader quantitative trends in the literature. However, a limitation is that the study was conducted in a single graduate course, which may limit generalizability to other disciplines or undergraduate populations. Still, its depth offers valuable guidance for educators experimenting with blended models.
Reflection:
This article resonates with my own experience teaching in higher education using Canvas and Engageli, where success often depends less on the tools themselves and more on how they are embedded within effective instructional design. I have observed similar dynamics in my use of SimNet labs, where structured guidance and feedback matter as much as the technology. The findings support my perspective that thoughtful alignment of pedagogy and technology is critical for student success in blended and online learning environments. I can draw on this article to inform my own teaching practices and potentially guide my doctoral research on technology integration.
Bridging Pedagogy and Technology in Blended Learning
This week I explored the article by Zhu, Sari, Lee, and So (2021), Effective instructional strategies and technology use in blended learning in a graduate course in the USA. I selected this article because it directly connects to my own teaching experience in higher education, where I have worked extensively with blended and online learning environments using platforms such as Canvas, Engageli, and SimNet. The article emphasizes that the success of blended learning is not simply about adopting technology, but about how instructional strategies and tools are integrated seamlessly to support engagement, active learning, and feedback.
From my teaching experience, I have observed the same principle. Canvas and Engageli on their own do not transform learning—what makes the difference is aligning them with strategies like structured discussions, interactive labs, and consistent feedback loops. For example, SimNet provides technical skill practice, but without scaffolding and timely instructor feedback, students often miss the deeper learning opportunities. Zhu et al.’s findings reinforce that effective blended learning requires educators to be intentional about how they combine technology with pedagogy.
This connection is particularly relevant to my journey in the Doctorate in Educational Technology (DET) program at Central Michigan University (CMU). One of the program’s goals is to prepare us to critically evaluate and implement educational technologies in ways that support equitable and effective learning. Zhu et al.’s case study highlights the type of evidence-based decision-making that the DET program emphasizes—recognizing that technology is a tool, but the real power lies in how we design and adapt learning experiences for diverse learners.
In relation to the five articles I have been studying, this piece builds on their foundational insights:
- Ross, Morrison, & Lowther (2010) reminded us of the importance of balancing rigor and relevance in educational technology research. Zhu et al. echo this by grounding their study in a real classroom context while also contributing to broader research conversations.
- Hoepfl (1997) introduced qualitative research as a way of capturing complexity. Zhu et al. used qualitative feedback from graduate students to illustrate how perceptions of blended learning are shaped by design choices, showing the value of qualitative approaches in ed tech studies.
- Cobb et al. (2003) emphasized design experiments and iterative cycles of testing and refinement. Zhu et al.’s focus on adapting strategies in a blended setting reflects this same design-based approach.
- Randolph (2007) highlighted the need for multidisciplinary methods. This study integrates perspectives from pedagogy, instructional design, and technology, illustrating the multidisciplinary nature of ed tech research.
- Drost (2011) underscored the importance of validity and reliability. While Zhu et al. acknowledge the limits of their single-course case study, their systematic approach and transparency add to the trustworthiness of their findings.
Overall, this article resonates with me because it connects the theory and methods I am engaging with in the DET program to my practical teaching experience. It reminds me that effective educational technology integration requires more than just adopting new tools—it demands thoughtful, evidence-informed instructional design that keeps student learning at the center.
#2
Reference (APA):
Oudat, Q., & Othman, M. (2024). Embracing digital learning: Benefits and challenges of using Canvas in education. Journal of Nursing Education and Practice, 14(10), 39. https://doi.org/10.5430/jnep.v14n10p39
Annotation
Summary:
This article explores the benefits and challenges of using Canvas as a Learning Management System (LMS) in higher education. Drawing on both literature and case studies, the authors highlight Canvas’s strengths, such as its flexibility, asynchronous support, collaborative tools, and built-in analytics that allow instructors to monitor engagement. At the same time, the article identifies challenges including accessibility barriers, inconsistent digital literacy, depersonalization of student experiences, and privacy concerns. Comparisons with other LMSs like Blackboard and Moodle underscore Canvas’s relative usability and student satisfaction, while also noting areas where it falls short.
Evaluation:
The article’s strength is its recency and its focus on Canvas specifically, which makes it highly relevant for instructors currently using the platform. Its balanced treatment of both advantages and limitations provides a clear picture of the LMS’s impact on teaching and learning. A limitation is that much of the evidence is drawn from nursing and health sciences contexts, which may not generalize perfectly to business, technology, or liberal arts settings. Additionally, while the article discusses analytics and collaboration, it does not fully explore best practices for synchronous live teaching within Canvas.
Reflection:
This article directly supports my professional and doctoral goals. As a professor teaching in Canvas at DeVry and a DET student at Central Michigan University, I am focused on designing online live sessions that are not only informative but also highly engaging and fun. The findings reinforce my own observations: Canvas provides powerful tools for collaboration and monitoring engagement, but without careful attention to design, students can feel disconnected. This parallels my IT project management experience, where the success of any tool depends on how it is implemented and supported. For my DET research, the article provides evidence to guide strategies for mitigating common barriers—like accessibility and depersonalization—while leveraging Canvas’s strengths to maximize motivation and interaction.
Bridging Research and Practice in Canvas-Based Teaching
This week I explored the article by Oudat and Othman (2024), Embracing digital learning: Benefits and challenges of using Canvas in education. I selected this piece because it connects directly to my daily teaching practice at DeVry, where Canvas is my primary platform, and to my doctoral goal of mastering online live teaching design. The article emphasizes both what Canvas enables—flexibility, collaboration, analytics—and where instructors must be vigilant, such as accessibility, usability, and student connection.
In my teaching experience, I have seen these dynamics firsthand. Canvas discussion boards and analytics can create real opportunities for engagement, but they require intentional instructional design to avoid feelings of isolation. This matches what I’ve observed in SimNet and Engageli: the tools themselves don’t drive success; it is the pedagogy and scaffolding behind them that make the difference. Oudat and Othman’s work reinforces my perspective that effective online teaching in Canvas requires balancing tool functionality with student-centered design choices.
This connection is highly relevant to my doctoral journey in the DET program. My aim is to build expertise in creating live online learning environments that are engaging, motivating, and even enjoyable for students. This article contributes to that goal by offering both a strengths-based and cautionary view of Canvas—helping me think critically about how to maximize its potential while designing around its limitations.
In relation to the five core articles from Week 4:
Drost (2011) discussed validity and reliability; Oudat and Othman acknowledge the contextual limitations of their findings, showing awareness of these methodological concerns.
Ross, Morrison, & Lowther (2010) stressed balancing rigor and relevance; Oudat and Othman demonstrate this balance by presenting Canvas research with both practical and scholarly implications.
Hoepfl (1997) introduced qualitative research; Oudat and Othman used descriptive and experiential data that highlight the value of qualitative evidence in understanding Canvas use.
Cobb et al. (2003) emphasized design experiments; the iterative refinements Canvas instructors must make to address challenges align with this approach.
Randolph (2007) called for multidisciplinary perspectives; this article integrates pedagogy, technology, and student experience in a way that reflects that call.
Tony Kaczoroski 
Leave a comment