Skip to content
2018
Volume 76, Issue 4
  • ISSN: 0010-096X
  • E-ISSN: 1939-9006

Abstract

This study explores student engagements with hybrid writing courses, revealing their experiences and perceptions of a modality that blends in-person and online instruction. Hybrid learning as a format is often overshadowed by its association with fully online instruction. After a number of writing courses on our campus were redesigned for hybrid delivery, we conducted interviews and focus groups with students taking those courses. What we found, among other things, was that students largely saw hybrid writing courses as striking a balance between the flexibility of online learning with opportunities for human contact and the social presence afforded by in-person class meetings. Even more intriguing, though, was how students talked about the purposes of—and relationships between—the online and in-person components of their hybrid courses. In other words, it was not just the case that students appreciated hybrid learning, but also that clear patterns emerged in the meanings and values they ascribed to the constituent elements of these courses and the perceived cohesiveness of instruction across the modes. This study ends with implications for the design and implementation of hybrid writing courses, and it emphasizes the need for further scholarship that recognizes the unique affordances and challenges of this instructional modality.

© 2025 by the National Council of Teachers of English
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.58680/ccc2025764494
2025-06-01
2026-07-21
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bowen William G., et al. “Interactive Learning Online at Public Universities: Evidence from Randomized Trials.” Ithaka S+R. 22 May 2012 https://sr.ithaka.org/publications/interactivelearning-online-at-public-universitiesevidence-from-randomized-trials/.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Boyd Patricia Webb. “Analyzing Students’ Perceptions of Their Learning in Online and Hybrid First-Year Composition Courses.” Computers and Composition, vol. 25, no. 2 2008, pp 224–43.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Chick Nancy, et al. “What the Research Tells Us about Higher Education’s Temporary Shift to Remote Teaching.” 20 Mar 2020 Google Docs file.
  4. Conference on College Composition and Communication Online Writing Instruction Standing Group. Report of the CCCC Standing Group for Best Practice in Online Writing Instruction (OWI): The 2021 State of the Art of OWI Report. Conference on College Composition and Communication 2022 https://sites.google.com/view/owistandinggroup/state-of-the-art-of-owi-2021.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Garrison D.Randy, and Vaughan Norman D.. Blended Learning in HigherEducation: Framework, Principles, and Guidelines. John Wiley & Sons 2008.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Gouge Catherine. “Conversation at a Crucial Moment: Hybrid Courses and the Future of Writing Programs.” College English, vol. 71 2009, pp 338–62.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Griffin June, and Minter Deborah. “The Rise of the Online Writing Classroom: Reflecting on the Material Conditions of College Composition Teaching.” College Composition and Communication, vol. 65, no. 1 2013, pp 140–61.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Hilliard Lyra P., and Stewart Mary K.. “Time Well Spent: Creating a Community of Inquiry in Blended First-Year Writing Courses.” The Internet and Higher Education, vol. 41 2019, pp 11–24.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Linder Kathryn E. The Blended Course Design Workbook: A Practical Guide. Routledge 2017.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Mällinen Sisko. “Teacher Effectiveness and Online Learning.” Teaching & Learning Online: New Pedagogies for New Technologies edited by Stephenson John, Routledge 2018 139–49.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Means Barbara, et al. Learning Online: What Research Tells Us about Whether, When and How. Routledge 2014.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Merriam Sharan B., and Tisdell Elizabeth J.. Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation. John Wiley & Sons 2015.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Salisbury Lauren E. “Just a Tool: Instructors’ Attitudes and Use of Course Management Systems for Online Writing Instruction.” Computers and Composition, vol. 48 2018, pp 1–17.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Shea Peter, and Bidjerano Temi. “Community of Inquiry as a Theoretical Framework to Foster ‘Epistemic Engagement’ and ‘Cognitive Presence’ in Online Education.” Computers & Education, vol. 52, no. 3 2009, pp 543–53.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Snart Jason Allen. “Hybrid and Fully Online OWI.” Foundational Practices of Online Writing Instruction edited by Hewett Beth L. and Eric DePew Kevin, WAC Clearinghouse 2015, pp 99–133.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Snart Jason Allen. Hybrid Learning: The Perils and Promise of Blending Online and Faceto-Face Instruction in Higher Education. Praeger 2010.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Stewart Mary K., et al. “Collaborative Course Design and Communities of Practice: Strategies for Adaptable Course Shells in Hybrid and Online Writing.” Transformative Dialogues: Teaching and Learning Journal, vol. 9, no. 1 2016, pp 1–20.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Stewart Mary K., et al. “How and What Students Learn in Hybrid and Online FYC: A Multi-Institutional Survey Study of Student Perceptions.” College Composition and Communication, vol. 73, no. 4 2022, pp 739–73.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Stine Linda. “The Best of Both Worlds: Teaching Basic Writers in Class and Online.” Journal of Basic Writing, vol. 23, no. 2 2004, pp 49–69.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Warnock Scott. Teaching Writing Online: How and Why. National Council of Teachers of English 2009.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.58680/ccc2025764494
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test