Hybrid Learning Spaces — A Three-Fold Evolving Perspective

Technology and educational ‘pivoting’ in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic: A collected commentary

“…He defined it as a means permitting learners "to attend a minimal number of classes while doing most of their studying independently via an online platform, audio-and/ or videocassettes, broadcasted television and radio programmes or other multimedia" (p. 7). Recently, Eyal and Gil (2022) proposed this hybrid setup "hybrid as blended". They declare it to be a "first generation" interpretation of hybridity featuring "two distinct worlds … Each is a separate and distinct entity, and their combination is a heterogeneous mixture … the properties of each of these learning modes are kept separate, like oil and water, which are immiscible" (p. 15).…”

“…They declare it to be a "first generation" interpretation of hybridity featuring "two distinct worlds … Each is a separate and distinct entity, and their combination is a heterogeneous mixture … the properties of each of these learning modes are kept separate, like oil and water, which are immiscible" (p. 15). Along with the categorisation of 'hybrid as blended', Eyal and Gil (2022) propose 2 other categorisations: 'hybrid as a space for merging interactions', and 'hybrid as fluid'. Eyal and Gil (2022) describe 'hybrid as a space for merging interaction' as the merging of the different spaces of learning activity and interactivity shifting to a more participative learning (and teaching) attitude spreading across "mobile (virtual), social and physical spaces" (p. 16).…”

“…Along with the categorisation of 'hybrid as blended', Eyal and Gil (2022) propose 2 other categorisations: 'hybrid as a space for merging interactions', and 'hybrid as fluid'. Eyal and Gil (2022) describe 'hybrid as a space for merging interaction' as the merging of the different spaces of learning activity and interactivity shifting to a more participative learning (and teaching) attitude spreading across "mobile (virtual), social and physical spaces" (p. 16). This kind of hybridity in TEL stresses the situated social perspective of learning in the invitation to lower the learning environment boundaries encouraging learning activity and interactivity to broaden and diversity in spreading across spaces and places.…”

“…This kind of hybridity in TEL stresses the situated social perspective of learning in the invitation to lower the learning environment boundaries encouraging learning activity and interactivity to broaden and diversity in spreading across spaces and places. Eyal and Gil (2022) interpret 'hybrid as fluid' as "the learners' choice that crosses boundaries, rather than being limited with constraints" (p. 19, highlighted bold in original text). They muse that while 'hybrid as a space for merging interactions' may be likened to a "compound", 'hybrid as fluid' is likened to "a 3D container [that] holds hybrid learning in its fluid state, dictating its limitations (p. 21).…”

“…Hilli, Nørgård, and Aaen (2019) also propose fluidity in hybridisation as lowering online/offline space distinction along with a whole array of boundary crossings including campus/world, teacher/student, formal/informal learning and otherwise segregated disciplines. These three differentiated ways of understanding hybridity offered by Eyal and Gil (2022) are not considered to be in conflict with each other. Each derives from the dimensions that are opened to make possible alternative autonomous existences in the generation of socio-material assemblages for learning and development.…”