A Comprehensive Hybrid and Flexible (‘HyFlex’) Course Architecture for Conceptual Modelling Courses in Information Systems
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3127/ajis.v29.5773Keywords:
Teaching, HyFlex, Hybrid course, Flexible course, Conceptual modellingAbstract
'HyFlex' is a catchword for course designs in higher education that provide students with the opportunity to attend course sessions in-person as well as remotely ('hybrid') and to change the mode of attending every week based on their circumstances and preferences ('flexible'). Due to the need to teach the complex skill of conceptual enterprise modelling (CEM) through practical exercises and feedback, HyFlex course designs for CEM courses pose several challenges to typical CEM-related learning outcomes. This paper proposes a set of design requirements, principles, and features for a comprehensive HyFlex course architecture for CEM courses. The design requirements, principles, and features evolved through and are evaluated against several iterations of CEM courses across two different programmes (undergraduate and postgraduate), student numbers (ranging from 17 to 121), settings (lecture & workshops, block mode, etc.), and course topics (business process and enterprise architecture modelling). The student performances and course evaluations indicate that the offered courses that instantiated the presented course architecture have been both effective and appreciated by the students. Other instructors can draw on our course architecture to design or adapt their own CEM courses – but also, to an extent, courses with other topics – to the HyFlex paradigm.
References
Abdelmalak, M. M. M., & Parra, J. L. (2016). Expanding learning opportunities for graduate students with HyFlex course design. International Journal of Online Pedagogy and Course Design (IJOPCD), 6(4), 19–37. doi.org/10.4018/IJOPCD.2016100102
Bandara, W., Chand, D., Chircu, A., Hintringer, S., Karagiannis, D., Recker, J., Rensburg, A., Usoff, C., & Welke, R. (2010). Business process management education in academia: Status, challenges, and recommendations. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 27(1), 743–776.
Beatty, B. J. (2019). Hybrid-Flexible Course Design. EdTech Books. https://edtechbooks.org/hyflex
Binnewies, S., & Wang, Z. (2019). Challenges of Student Equity and Engagement in a HyFlex Course. In Blended Learning Designs in STEM Higher Education (pp. 209–230). Springer. doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-6982-7_12
Bjeković, M., Proper, H. A., & Sottet, J.-S. (2014). Enterprise Modelling Languages. In B. Shishkov (Ed.), Business Modeling and Software Design (pp. 1–23). Springer International Publishing. doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06671-4_1
Bogdanova, D., & Snoeck, M. (2018). Using MOOC Technology and Formative Assessment in a Conceptual Modelling Course: An Experience Report. Proceedings of the 21st ACM/IEEE International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems: Companion Proceedings, pp. 67-73. doi.org/10.1145/3270112.327012
Bork, D. (2019). A Framework for Teaching Conceptual Modeling and Metamodeling Based on Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences 2019 (HICSS-52). https://aisel.aisnet.org/hicss-52/set/methods_models/7
Darwazeh, A. N. (2017). A New Revision of the [Revised] Bloom’s Taxonomy. Distance Learning, 14(3), 13–28.
Drechsler, A. (2021). From synchronous face-to-face group work to asynchronous individual work: Pivoting an enterprise modeling course for teaching during a COVID-19 lockdown. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 48(1), 22.
Drechsler, A., & Hevner, A. (2022). Knowledge Paths in Design Science Research. Foundations and Trends® in Information Systems, 6(3), 171–243. doi.org/10.1561/2900000028
Drews, P., & Schirmer, I. (2014). From enterprise architecture to business ecosystem architecture: Stages and challenges for extending architectures beyond organizational boundaries. 2014 IEEE 18th International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference Workshops and Demonstrations, 13–22. doi.org/10.1109/EDOCW.2014.12
Dumas, M., Rosa, M. L., Mendling, J., & Reijers, H. A. (2018). Fundamentals of Business Process Management (2nd ed. 2018 edition). Springer.
Eduglopedia. (2022). Topics. https://eduglopedia.org/keyword/all?sorting=&display=cloud
Fox, M. S., & Grüninger, M. (1997). Ontologies for enterprise modelling. In Enterprise Engineering and Integration (pp. 190–200). Springer. doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-60889-6_22
Gregor, S. (2006). The nature of theory in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 30(3), 611–642. doi.org/10.2307/25148742
Gregor, S., & Hevner, A. R. (2013). Positioning and Presenting Design Science Research for Maximum Impact. MIS Quarterly, 37(2), 337-A6.
Hoppenbrouwers, S. (2012). Asking Questions about Asking Questions in Collaborative Enterprise Modelling. In K. Sandkuhl, U. Seigerroth, & J. Stirna (Eds.), The Practice of Enterprise Modeling (pp. 16–30). Springer. doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-34549-4_2
Hoppenbrouwers, S., Proper, H. A., & van der Weide, T. P. (2005). Formal modelling as a grounded conversation. Proceedings of the 10th International Working Conference on the Language Action Perspective on Commmunication Modelling, 139–155.
Jung, R., & Lehrer, C. (2017). Guidelines for Education in Business and Information Systems Engineering at Tertiary Institutions. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 59(3), 189–203. doi.org/10.1007/s12599-017-0473-5
Keiper, M. C., White, A., Carlson, C. D., & Lupinek, J. M. (2020). Student perceptions on the benefits of Flipgrid in a HyFlex learning environment. Journal of Education for Business, 96(6), 343–351. doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2020.1832431
Kester, L., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2021). Implications of the Four Component Instructional Design Model for Multimedia Learning. In L. Fiorella & R. E. Mayer (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning (3rd ed., pp. 100–120). Cambridge University Press. doi.org/10.1017/9781108894333.011
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 212–218. doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
Laurillard, D. (2013). Teaching as a design science: Building pedagogical patterns for learning and technology. Routledge. doi.org/10.4324/9780203125083
Leidig, P., & Salmela, H. (2021). IS2020: A Competency Model for Undergraduate Programs in Information Systems. ACM & AIS. www.acm.org/binaries/content/assets/education/curricula-recommendations/is2020.pdf
Lukyanenko, R., & Parsons, J. (2020). Research Perspectives: Design Theory Indeterminacy: What Is it, How Can it Be Reduced, and Why Did the Polar Bear Drown? Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 21(5). doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00639
Malczyk, B. R. (2019). Introducing social work to HyFlex blended learning: A student-centered approach. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 39(4–5), 414–428. doi.org/10.1080/08841233.2019.1652226
Meth, H., Mueller, B., & Maedche, A. (2015). Designing a Requirement Mining System. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 16(9). http://aisel.aisnet.org/jais/vol16/iss9/2
Miller, J., Risser, M., & Griffiths, R. (2013). Student choice, instructor flexibility: Moving beyond the blended instructional model. Issues and Trends in Educational Technology, 1(1), 8–24. doi.org/10.2458/azu_itet_v1i1_miller
Nicolai, A. T., & Seidl, D. (2010). That’s Relevant! Different Forms of Practical Relevance in Management Science. Organization Studies, 31(9/10), 1257–1285. doi.org/10.1177/0170840610374401
Recker, J., Lukyanenko, R., Jabbari Sabegh, M., Samuel, B., & Castellanos, A. (2021). From representation to mediation: A new agenda for conceptual modeling research in a digital world. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 45(1), 269–300.
Recker, J., & Rosemann, M. (2009). Teaching business process modelling: Experiences and recommendations. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 25(1), 32.
Rosenthal, K., Ternes, B., & Strecker, S. (2019). Learning Conceptual Modeling: Structuring overview, research themes and paths for future research. Proceedings of the ECIS 2019 Conference. https://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2019_rp/137/
Simon, H. A. (1996). The Sciences of the Artificial (3rd ed). MIT Press.
Tanner, M., & Scott, E. (2015). A flipped classroom approach to teaching systems analysis, design and implementation. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 14(2015), 219–241. www.jite.org/documents/Vol14/JITEv14ResearchP219-241Tanner1840.pdf
Thalheim, B. (2010). Towards a theory of conceptual modelling. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 16(20), 3102–3137.
Venable, J., Pries-Heje, J., & Baskerville, R. (2016). FEDS: A Framework for Evaluation in Design Science Research. European Journal of Information Systems, 25(1), 77–89. doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2014.36
Vom Brocke, J., Winter, R., Hevner, A. R., & Maedche, A. (2020). Special Issue Editorial–Accumulation and Evolution of Design Knowledge in Design Science Research: A Journey Through Time and Space. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 21(3), 520–544. doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00611
Wand, Y., & Weber, R. (2002). Research Commentary: Information Systems and Conceptual Modeling—A Research Agenda. Information Systems Research, 13(4), 363–376. doi.org/10.1287/isre.13.4.363.69
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Andreas Drechsler, Cathal Doyle
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License.
AJIS publishes open-access articles distributed under the terms of a Creative Commons Non-Commercial and Attribution License which permits non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and AJIS are credited. All other rights including granting permissions beyond those in the above license remain the property of the author(s).
