That difference was highlighted in a webinar I listened to recently by two of the Christensen Institute's disciples, Arthur VanderVeen, VP of Business Strategies for Compass Learning, and Tom Vander Ark, author of Getting Smart: How Digital Learning is Changing the World and CEO of Getting Smart, a learning advocacy firm. The different models might be attributable to the different arenas in which the two pairs work. Vander Ark and Vander Veen are part of the corporate business world that is trying to take over the K-12 educational system; Vaughan and Garrsion are professors of education and researchers and have so far focused primarily on higher education. Both groups have intentions of impacting the other's realms.
Their respective intent and purpose probably has more to do with the different models, though. Garrison and Vaughan are interested in developing a stronger richer community of inquiry and learning; Vander Ark and Vander Veen want to blow things up and make money putting them back together again. They follow the Christensen's Institute's disruptive model. I've written about Christensen's disruptive model previously in a discussion of the book, Disrupting Class. That book was all about using technology to replace teachers and create new models for the U.S. K-12 education system. As I pointed out, the first edition of the book didn't mention blended learning. They've added a section on their brand of blended learning in later editions.
9 and 1/2 minutes into their webinar, Vander Ark and Vander Veen brought up the notion that their blended learning model would reduce the need for teachers and change teacher work rules; that's code for fire teachers and bust unions. Vander Ark and Vander Veen are selling to the corporate / charter school money making interests all too prevalent today. The counterpart to that in the higher ed world is the MOOC phenomenon, which is also based on the notion that teachers are expendable and cost too much. Vander Ark and Vander Veen are well connected to moneyed interests, so I'll give them the best odds for the early rounds in the coming clash between these two models of blended learning. In the long run, though, I think "the quality and quantity of the interaction and the sense of engagement in a community of inquiry and learning" will carry the day. I'll go with Garrison and Vaughan.
