{"schema_version":"ICEQC_NEWS_ARTICLE_V1","id":"iceqc-news-b4aa5e1e6cd438ce","slug":"2021-01-29-hybrid-learning-defining-responsibilities-and-exclusions","language":"en","publication_status":"READY_FOR_IMPORT","publication_date":"2021-01-29","last_modified_date":"2021-01-29","title":"Hybrid learning: defining responsibilities and exclusions","summary":"Clarifies the practical meaning of hybrid learning: defining responsibilities and exclusions and the evidence required to support a reliable assurance conclusion.","category":{"code":"STANDARDS_INTERPRETATION","label":"Standards Interpretation"},"article_type":"Standards interpretation","publisher":"International Council for Education Quality Certification (ICEQC)","jurisdictional_scope":"International","historical_reference_basis":"Sustained combination of on-site and remote delivery","reference_authority":"Relevant public authorities and official international sources","sections":[{"heading":null,"paragraphs":["Current consideration of hybrid learning is informed by the sustained combination of on-site and remote delivery, with consequences for governance, evidence and the treatment of affected learners. In reviewing the stated expectation, the central issue is the meaning of the expectation in practice, including its scope, the evidence needed to demonstrate it and the circumstances in which it may not apply. The assessment addresses decisions capable of affecting learners, institutions or the proper use of entrusted educational resources.","The principal risks in relation to the control are assessment methods that do not support valid judgements, unclear identity and participation records, technology access determining educational access, and inaccessible content or interaction. The control environment should be assessed as a connected system rather than as unrelated individual risks."]},{"heading":"Applicable scope","paragraphs":["Responsibility for hybrid learning should be visible at the point where consequential decisions are made. Oversight of the stated expectation should reflect the principle that a provider should be able to trace the expectation from approved policy through implementation, monitoring, identified exceptions and corrective action. In relation to hybrid learning, incomplete evidence, unmanaged conflict, absent learner groups or material learner impact require a higher level of review.","The historical reference basis is the sustained combination of on-site and remote delivery. Its relevance to the stated expectation should be assessed against the affected jurisdiction, learner population and form of provision.","The technical issue within the control concerns the basis on which a conclusion is reached. Oversight of the control should reflect the principle that scope should identify the people, decisions, services, locations and periods to which the arrangement applies. Exclusions require an objective reason and should not be inferred from organisational custom or the absence of an earlier complaint. A conclusion should identify both its evidential basis and the part of the stated scope for which assurance cannot be given."],"bullets":["Assure assessment validity.","Test access before requiring use.","Support staff and learners.","Provide alternative routes for material barriers.","Maintain continuity and supplier exit controls."]},{"heading":"Implementation and evidence","paragraphs":["Interpretation of hybrid learning should avoid two errors: treating a formal commitment as proof of effect, and treating one adverse case as proof that every part of the system has failed. Oversight of the relevant requirement should reflect the principle that digital participation data should not be treated as a direct measure of learning. Log-ins, connection time and activity counts require interpretation alongside assessment and learner experience. The analysis of the relevant requirement proceeds on the basis that an isolated example cannot establish consistent operation, and an isolated failure should be evaluated for materiality, recurrence and systemic effect.","Assurance of the stated expectation should draw on more than one form of evidence. Useful records include service availability and incident records, delivery-mode design and approval records, supplier performance and exit arrangements, assessment validity and integrity reviews, and teacher capability and workload information. System-wide assurance cannot be inferred from a favourable case chosen after the event.","The assurance record for the assurance question should retain the date of the evidence, the source responsible for it, the scope examined and the version of any instrument or definition applied. In relation to hybrid learning, revision should not remove an earlier conclusion from the record where reliance has occurred."]},{"heading":"Assessment of conformity","paragraphs":["For operational review of hybrid learning, authorities and providers should proceed in a defined sequence. In reviewing the issue under review, responsible bodies should begin with the intended public or educational outcome, map every activity capable of affecting that outcome, and record where responsibility passes between functions or organisations. Test boundary cases before confirming the scope.","Interpretation of the assurance question should produce a test that another competent reviewer can apply to comparable evidence."],"bullets":["Which learners and services are included?","Where does responsibility transfer?","How are changes in scope detected?","Who can authorise an exclusion?","Does the same outcome apply across delivery modes?"]},{"heading":"Review and corrective action","paragraphs":["For hybrid learning, the public interest is not confined to institutional compliance. In reviewing the control, a change in delivery mode should not weaken the defined learning outcomes, learner protection, accessibility or reliability of assessment. Where learners rely on published information or support decisions, errors should be identifiable and capable of prompt, fair correction.","Public reporting on the control should distinguish established fact, analytical judgement and planned action. Material revisions should be traceable to their reason and effective date.","The measure of progress on the stated expectation is not the amount of policy or documentation produced. Performance should be judged by outcomes and timely response to shortfalls, not by the volume of administrative activity."]}],"word_count":750,"content_hash":"sha256-55ca58ccce8d2a50367172f5fbc42d83a5ca2bb159c5f046fd9b1cf184a4c708","seo_keywords":["hybrid learning","education quality standards","education quality","ICEQC"],"schema_type":"TechArticle"}