Relatively little research on blended learning (BL) addresses institutional adoption in higher education. Graham, Woodfield, and Harrison (2012) proposed a framework for institutional BL adoption, identifying three stages: (a) awareness/exploration, (b) adoption/early implementation, and (c) mature implementation/growth. The framework also identified key strategy, structure, and support issues universities may address at each stage. In this series of articles, the authors applied that framework to institutions of higher education implementing BL. In the first article, the authors applied the framework to 11 Next Generation Learning Challenge (NGLC) grant recipients transitioning from Stage 1 to Stage 2 of BL adoption. The authors compared U.S. institutional strategy, structure, and support approaches to BL adoption and identified patterns and distinctions. In the final two articles, the authors applied the framework as well as Rogers' (2003) diffusion of innovations theory to determine the degree to which and why institutional strategy, structure, and support measures would facilitate or impede BL adoption among higher education faculty. The authors also explored whether faculty's innovation adoption category would affect which measures facilitated or impeded BL adoption. To achieve these objectives, the authors surveyed and interviewed faculty at BYU-Idaho (BYU-I). In the second article, the authors reviewed the survey results to determine (a) the appropriate innovation adoption category for each faculty member and (b) the factors that impacted faculty decisions to adopt BL. In the third article, the authors reviewed the results of the interviews to identify why participants reported strategy, structure, and support decisions would impact their decision to adopt BL.



College and Department

David O. McKay School of Education; Instructional Psychology and Technology



Date Submitted


Document Type





post-secondary education, blended learning, hybrid courses, faculty adoption, institutional adoption, higher education policy