1. Advanced Distributed Learning. (2003). What Works in Distance Learning: Guidelines. Retrieved March 29, 2004 from www.adlnet.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=DLGuid

"A highly interactive tool that will allow the DL community to quickly identify strategies to address their concerns. This offers legitimate guidance for researchers, instructors, program managers, and instructional or assessment designers of DL programs."

2. Aycock, Alan, Garnham, Carla and Kaleta, Robert. (2002, March 20). Lessons Learned from the Hybrid Course Project. Teaching with Technology Today v6, n6. Retrieved March 25, 2004 from www.uwsa.edu/ttt/articles/garnham2.htm

The authors give insights into introducing blended (hybrid) learning on their campus. Flexibility is the key stressed in this article. A wide variety of approaches can be taken to achieve the desired educational outcomes.

3. Carman, Jared M. (2002, October). Blended Learning Design: Five Key Ingredients. KnowledgeNet. Retrieved March 25, 2004 from http://www.knowledgenet.com/pdf/Blended%20Learning%20Design_1028.PDF

The author takes a corporate approach to the topic. But, there is an excellent discussion of the theories and pedagogical approaches that support blended learning. Blending cognitivism, performance support and constructivism, the author creates a case for a blend of theories supporting the use of blended learning.

4. Elearnspace. Everything elearning. (nd). Retrieved March 29, 2004 from www.elearnspace.org/doing/blended.htm

An introduction to blending courses including definitions of terms, models, how-tos, debate.

5. Garrison, R., Kanuka, H. and Hawes, D. Blended Learning in a Research University. Learning Commons Communities of Inquiry. Retrieved March 25, 2004 from www.commons.ucalgary.ca/documents/BlendedLearning_1.pdf

The authors highlight the inquiry of the University of Calgary into increase their learning effectiveness in a cost-effective way. Blended learning is examined as one method of enhancing learning through a "multiplier effect" of combining the strengths of face-to-face and Internet based learning.

6. Ocotillo. Landscape of Technology & Learning @ Maricopa. (since 1987). Hybrid Course Resources. Retrieved March 29, 2004 from www.mcli.dist.maricopa.edu/ocotillo/hybrids/index.php

A collection of resources about designing hybrid courses, including policy statements, reports, articles, example courses, and an automatic Google search with 7,750 results.

7. Rossett, Allison; Douglis, Felicia and Frazee, Rebecca V. (2003, June 30). Strategies for Building Blended Learning. Learning Circuits, American Society for Training and Development. Retrieved March 25, 2004 from www.learningcircuits.org/2003/jul2003/rossett.htm

The authors examine a range of blended methods in both the educational and business realms. Useful charts diagram a matrix of approaches. Excellent tips and recommendations are included. A brief bibliography of additional reading is appended.

8. Singh, Harvey. (2003, November-December). Building Effective Blended Learning Programs. Educational Technology, Volume 43, Number 6, Pages 51-54. Retrieved March 25, 2004 from www.bookstoread.com/framework/blended-learning.pdf

The author uses Badrul Kahn’s Octagonal Framework chart to examine aspects of blended learning. A variety of blends are examined. Examples are drawn from various universities.

9. Singh, Harvi and Reed, Chris. (2001). A White Paper: Achieving Success with Blended Learning. Centra Software. Retrieved March 25, 2004 from www.centra.com/download/whitepapers/blendedlearning.pdf

Although the paper takes a corporate approach, it is premised on the same valued principles as higher education: focusing on learning objectives and responsive to a variety of learning styles. A wide range blends and their relative strengths are described. A nice appendix of delivery technology mapping is included.

10. Voos, Richard. (2003, February) Blended Learning- What it is and where it might take us? Sloan-C View v2 issue 1. Retrieved March 25, 2004 from www.aln.org/publications/view/v2n1/blended1.htm

The author provides a good, brief overview of the movement toward blended learning. Examples at several institutions are given. The author makes a good case that it may not be the "blendedness" that makes a difference, rather it is the inherent re-evaluation of the content and delivery that makes the fundamental difference.