


























Alarakyia - Jivani et al. 2024 (d).docx


Emerging Perspectives
ep.journalhosting.ucalgary.ca

Blended and Online Learning Policy Development in Higher Education: Key
Considerations

Raisa Alarakyia - Jivani*, Cameron Carley, Alysia Christine Wright

University of Calgary

The global use of blended and online learning (BOL) in higher education has
recently increased due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This exponential expansion
requires higher education institutions to prioritize scholarship and examine the
policies, frameworks, practices, and structures that support a clear objective toward
high-quality BOL that is cohesive across faculty and programs. Within Canada, the
U15 Group of Canadian Research Universities (U15s) describe the top research
universities that exemplify the production of scholarship that influences research and
policy within and outside higher education institutions. Through conducting two
environmental scans of BOL policies at the U15s in 2022, the authors identified
important elements of BOL policies that could be useful in future institutional
planning and decision-making related to modality. The authors isolated key themes
that would benefit institutions in standardizing and offered comprehensive strategies
and limitations to ensure consistent regulation of BOL policies. Ultimately, there is
no singular approach to creating effective policy regarding BOL. However, creating
and implementing BOL policy is necessary for high-quality BOL practices.

Keywords: Blended and online learning, Policy, Higher education, U15s

Alarakyia-Jivani, R., Carley, C., & Wright, A. C. (2024). Blended and online learning
policy development in higher education: Key considerations. Emerging Perspectives
Special Edition: Designing for Digital Futures, 7(1), 1–7.

Globally, the COVID-19 pandemic has led to increased usage of blended and online

learning (henceforth, BOL) in higher education (Bhagat & Kim, 2020; Coman et al., 2020).

Higher education institutions constantly search for effective ways to create, enhance, and sustain

BOL practices. This research brief focuses on common considerations of BOL policies based on

two environmental scans of the present BOL policies and guidelines at the U15 Group of

Canadian Research Universities (U15s), the top research universities in Canada. The authors

conclude with recommendations regarding BOL policy development.

*raisa.jivani@ucalgary.ca



Alarakyia-Jivani et al./ Emerging Perspectives (2024) 2

Background

King and Alperstein (2017) emphasized that the effectiveness and success of higher

education BOL programs depend on a clear institutional vision and strategic plan with clearly

defined policies, processes, and structures. Yet, definitions of BOL vary, leading to challenges in

policy creation. For example, Graham (2006) described blended learning as a combination of

in-person and digital instruction. In contrast, Garrison and Kanuka (2004) emphasized the

subjective nature of both in-person and online learning environments. Furthermore, online

learning is difficult to define due to its conflation with other forms of learning, such as distance

learning and e-learning (Moore et al., 2011; Singh & Thurman, 2019). Policy definitions also

include discrepancies. According to Delaney (2017), policy should be established by a variety of

institutional stakeholders with a clear aim.

In contrast, Pal (2006) defined policy as "a course of action or inactivity determined by a

public authority to handle a given problem or interrelated set of problems" (p. 2). Ultimately,

King and Alperstein (2017) emphasized that BOL policies should be clearly defined and should

reflect the interests of all institutional stakeholders engaging in BOL. For context, Freeman

(1984) defines a stakeholder as “Any group or individual who can affect or is affected by the

achievement of the organization’s objectives” (p. 46). As such, stakeholders include, but are not

limited to, students, faculty, staff, administrators, and donors.

Methods

In January 2022, the first author conducted an environmental scan of the U15 Group of

Canadian Universities (U15s) by reviewing the websites of each U15 for policies related to BOL

(Table 1). The U15 Group of Canadian Research Universities is a collective of Canada's top 15

research-intensive universities. These institutions are recognized for their leadership in research



Alarakyia-Jivani et al./ Emerging Perspectives (2024) 3

and higher education, conducting “79 percent of all competitive university research in Canada”

and producing “more than 70 percent of all doctorates awarded in Canada” (U15 Group of

Canadian Research Universities, 2016). The scan involved reviewing the websites of each U15

institution to identify policies, guidelines, or frameworks that addressed BOL practices. The

search identified existing policies, guidelines, or frameworks concerning blended and online

learning (BOL). To capture a comprehensive view, we employed a range of search terms,

including variations like “blended learning policy,” “online learning guidelines,” “BOL

framework,” “e-learning strategies,” “digital learning policy,” and “remote learning guidelines.”

Recognizing that universities may use different terminology, additional terms like “BOL

guidelines,” “blended learning frameworks,” and “online learning practices” were also included.

Specific U15-related terms, such as “U15 BOL policy” and “U15 online learning guidelines,”

were used to focus on the Canadian research universities. The first author conducted a second

scan in October 2022 to determine if any new policies had emerged or had been updated. The

secondary environmental scan results noted that the University of Ottawa and Queen’s

University initially had guidelines for BOL, but those guidelines were removed by October 2022.

It was determined that only one U15, the University of British Columbia, had an explicit BOL

policy which only encompassed assessments, though it was later replaced by more general

guidelines. Additionally, three U15s outlined BOL guidelines that recommended BOL practices:

Dalhousie University, McMaster University, and the University of Toronto. The U15s that had

neither a BOL policy nor guidelines were McGill University, Queen’s University, Université de

Montréal, University Laval, University of Alberta, University of Calgary, University of

Manitoba, University of Ottawa, University of Saskatchewan, University of Waterloo, and

University of Western Ontario. The second author organized critical aspects of the existing BOL



Alarakyia-Jivani et al./ Emerging Perspectives (2024) 4

policy and the three guidelines into nine themes through thematic analysis (Braun & Clark,

2006). Specifically, the thematic analysis included the coding and organization of data into

succinct themes, isolated as academic integrity, accessibility, assessments, cybersecurity,

framework development, professional development and support, student engagement and

support, technology, and terminology.

Table 1

List of U15 Universities and Corresponding BOL Policies

U15 University BOL Policy Website

University of Alberta No BOL policy

University of British Columbia https://distancelearning.ubc.ca/learner-support
/policies-and-procedures/

University of Calgary No BOL policy

Dalhousie University https://www.dal.ca/dept/clt/e-learning/elearnin
g_strategy.html

Université Laval No BOL policy

University of Manitoba No BOL policy

McGill University No BOL policy

McMaster University https://studentsuccess.mcmaster.ca/writing-an
d-academic-skills/online-learning/

Université de Montréal No BOL policy

University of Ottawa No BOL policy

Queen’s University No BOL policy

University of Saskatchewan No BOL policy

University of Toronto https://www.sgs.utoronto.ca/policies-guidelin
es/online-learning-guidelines/

https://distancelearning.ubc.ca/learner-support/policies-and-procedures/
https://distancelearning.ubc.ca/learner-support/policies-and-procedures/
https://www.dal.ca/dept/clt/e-learning/elearning_strategy.html
https://www.dal.ca/dept/clt/e-learning/elearning_strategy.html
https://studentsuccess.mcmaster.ca/writing-and-academic-skills/online-learning/
https://studentsuccess.mcmaster.ca/writing-and-academic-skills/online-learning/
https://www.sgs.utoronto.ca/policies-guidelines/online-learning-guidelines/
https://www.sgs.utoronto.ca/policies-guidelines/online-learning-guidelines/


Alarakyia-Jivani et al./ Emerging Perspectives (2024) 5

University of Waterloo No BOL policy

Western University No BOL policy

Results

Table 2 illustrates key themes identified within the existing BOL policy and guidelines at

the U15s (See Appendix A).

Table 2

BOL Policy and Guideline Themes

Document Theme and
Definition

Implications Universities

Guideline Academic
Integrity:

The
responsibility
of ethical
student

participation in
academia

1. Consistent consequences are
outlined in response to breaches
of academic integrity

2. Comprehensive academic
integrity information appears on
all course syllabi

McMaster
University

Guideline Accessibility:
The ability to

have
comprehensive

physical,
cognitive, and

financial
access to
learning

3. BOL features and practices are
purposefully included so BOL
can be accessed by all students

4. The Universal Design for
Learning framework and assistive
technologies are implemented
into BOL classrooms

University of
Toronto

Policy Assessments:
The

assessment of
knowledge

through virtual
tests, projects,
and essays

5. A clear procedure is followed
when assessments are incomplete
or plagiarized

6. Deadlines, procedures, and
technological tools regarding the
submission of students’ final
grades is standardized

University of
British Columbia



Alarakyia-Jivani et al./ Emerging Perspectives (2024) 6

Guideline Cybersecurity:
How digital
information is

secured,
accessed, and
used by the
institution

7. Stakeholders’ access to
information is consistent and
monitored

8. Cybersecurity training is
established, alongside outlining
protocol in response to
cybersecurity threats

McMaster
University

Guideline Framework
Development:

The
improvement

of BOL
practices and
designs over a
consistent
timeframe

9. Institutional BOL approaches are
continuously improved and
reviewed as BOL evolves

10. BOL models are created as a
framework for BOL course
creation and maintenance

11. Feedback about BOL from all
university stakeholders is
collected and organized

Dalhousie
University

Guideline Professional
Development
and Support:
How faculty
are supported
through BOL
knowledge
expansion

12. BOL resources within and outside
of the classroom are promoted for
faculty use

13. BOL training opportunities for
stakeholders are provided

Dalhousie
University

University of
Toronto

Guideline Student
Engagement
and Support:
How students
interact and
receive

guidance in
BOL

14. Technologies and strategies used
to enhance students’ BOL
experiences are implemented

15. Interactive features and instructor
presence are upheld to ensure
student engagement and
accessibility

Dalhousie
University
McMaster
University

University of
Toronto

Guideline Technology:
The virtual
tools utilized
to convey and

expedite
knowledge
transfer

16. Training opportunities for
technology within the BOL
classroom are provided, alongside
standards for appropriate use

17. Feedback systems from
stakeholders are organized to
improve upon BOL technologies

University of
Toronto

Guideline Terminology:
The linguistic
etiquette that is

18. An outline of appropriate and
inappropriate language within
BOL environments

University of
Toronto



Alarakyia-Jivani et al./ Emerging Perspectives (2024) 7

appropriate
within BOL

19. A comprehensive definition of
BOL that is consistent throughout
all faculties

The following themes encompass recommendations that would be useful for BOL policy

development.

Academic Integrity

Academic integrity is a fundamental aspect of BOL, as it entails the respect and

responsibility students must demonstrate when participating in class. Many institutions have

established and are committed to maintaining high standards of academic integrity within their

programs. According to McMaster University’s (Student Success Centre, n.d.) guidelines, clear

definitions of academic integrity are vital when implementing BOL policy, alongside

standardized consequences and procedures that address breaches of academic integrity.

Furthermore, BOL policy should transparently address these standards within all course syllabi

across the institution. From these standards, BOL policy results in more explicit expectations

about academic integrity in BOL that are consistent across the institution for all stakeholders.

Accessibility

Institutions are responsible for ensuring that BOL environments are accessible for all

students with diverse physical, cognitive, or financial abilities. To achieve this, The University of

Toronto (School of Graduate Studies, 2022) posits that accessibility must address key design

factors that encourage all students to participate in class online with the standards of equity,

diversity, and inclusion (Accessibility, n.d.), which can be addressed within BOL policy.

Additionally, institutions should incorporate UDL (Universal Design for Learning) frameworks

within these environments, ensuring consideration and awareness of the diverse needs of all

learners. The policy should also promote incorporating assistive technologies to support students'



Alarakyia-Jivani et al./ Emerging Perspectives (2024) 8

learning needs, alongside partnering with technology providers to consistently improve the

quality of this technology. Finally, accessibility resources must be communicated to all

stakeholders to raise awareness regarding the multiple dimensions of accessibility.

Assessment

The University of British Columbia accentuates that assessments encompass the

evaluation of student knowledge through virtual tests, projects, and essays (Policies and

procedures, n.d.). Regarding BOL policy, this university emphasized explicit definitions of

plagiarism and outlined responses to incomplete or plagiarized assessments, which was

connected to the institution’s policy on academic integrity. In addition, the policy must address

the deadlines and procedures for submission of students’ final grades. Institutions must also

provide clear appeal processes for students who miss deadlines due to technical issues or

personal circumstances.

Cybersecurity

Investing in cybersecurity is essential, especially in BOL environments: It is the

institution's responsibility to ensure that digital information is secured, accessed, and used by the

institution to protect stakeholders' privacy. All stakeholders must be informed regarding the

procedures for protecting this digital information (University Technology Services, n.d.). The

policy framework should also highlight the guidelines and consequences in place when

disregarding cybersecurity. Institutions should be committed to providing secure BOL spaces,

considering confidentiality, integrity, and availability of digital information. As digital spaces

change frequently, institutions should prioritize reviews to question if the present framework is

still effective in protecting the institution’s BOL environments.

BOL Framework Development



Alarakyia-Jivani et al./ Emerging Perspectives (2024) 9

To ensure BOL environments are practical and successful, it is essential that BOL design

be improved upon indefinitely, as BOL continues to evolve (Centre for Teaching and Learning,

2019). In creating this framework, feedback from stakeholders is valuable and must be utilized to

improve the BOL experience, which prompts the creation of various positions or teams to collect

and use this information:

Chief Online Learning Officer (COLO)

This senior administration role establishes online learning budget goals, examines

strategies for improving online classrooms, oversees stakeholder training in online learning

environments, and focuses on implementing BOL policies (Christians, n.d.; Garret et al., 2021;

Herron et al., n.d.). Ultimately, the COLO ensures consistency throughout online learning within

the institution. COLOs did not appear in any of the U15 policies and guidelines regarding BOL.

Online Program Manager (OPM)

This role coordinates online learning programs that expand across different institutions

(Cote & White, 2020). Thus, the OPM is responsible for cross-institutional collaboration to

foster consistency and quality in online learning across different institutions. OPMs did not

appear in the U15 policies and guidelines regarding BOL.

Councils and Committees

The Coordinating Council liaises between administrators, professors, and students who

have experience in BOL, often through faculty representatives who report information to this

council (Lim et al., 2019). Once these experiences are synthesized, they are passed to a Steering

Committee, which manages and creates new BOL initiatives. All this information is streamlined

to the vice president for teaching and learning, who records new knowledge. Creating these roles

can improve the efficacy of BOL and ensure that stakeholder feedback is used to refine BOL



Alarakyia-Jivani et al./ Emerging Perspectives (2024) 10

environments continuously. Coordinating councils did not appear in any of the U15 policies and

guidelines regarding BOL.

Professional Development and Support

Faculty within BOL environments should be provided with professional development and

opportunities to improve their knowledge regarding BOL to enhance the quality of their courses

(Centre for Teaching and Learning, 2019; School of Graduate Studies, 2022). This type of

professional development could include workshops, training sessions, online courses, and

conferences. It should be provided in various formats and at varying times to ensure faculty

availability. In addition, the institution should regularly evaluate and assess the effectiveness of

these opportunities and encourage modifications as needed.

Student Engagement and Support

Student engagement and support are essential to BOL to ensure positive and fulfilling

learning experiences (Centre for Teaching and Learning, 2019; School of Graduate Studies,

2022; Student Success Centre, n.d.). Technologies and strategies, especially instructor presence,

must be utilized to enhance students’ BOL experiences. In addition, institutional guidelines

should support instructors in facilitating effective communication between themselves and

students. Finally, it is critical for institutions to collect feedback from students to ensure that they

are receiving the necessary and relevant support within their BOL experiences.

Technology

Technology is a vital component of BOL environments and includes the virtual tools used

to convey and expedite knowledge transfer (School of Graduate Studies, 2022). It is critical that

institutions provide training opportunities for all stakeholders in appropriate technology use

within BOL classrooms. Higher education institutions must establish clear definitions for the



Alarakyia-Jivani et al./ Emerging Perspectives (2024) 11

proper uses of the technology within these BOL environments. Finally, institutions should ensure

opportunities for stakeholders to provide feedback to ensure the best use of these technologies.

Terminology

It is important for institutions to provide consistent and unambiguous terminology within

BOL environments (School of Graduate Studies, 2022), and this should be a strong focus of the

framework. Institutions must ensure that a comprehensive definition for BOL is established and

consistently used throughout all faculties and programs. Institutions must also provide guidelines

surrounding appropriate and inappropriate terminology, ensuring all stakeholders understand

what language is acceptable in BOL environments. Finally, feedback from all stakeholders

should be collected to improve and continuously add terminology used in BOL environments.

Discussion

Our findings indicate that BOL policies promote clarity, consistency, and continuity in

decision-making related to modality and program delivery in higher education (Ashraf et al.,

2021; Rajabalee & Santally, 2021). Based on our review, we recommend that future research

focus on creating diverse frameworks that inform BOL policy development. Given the paucity of

dedicated BOL policies in the U15s, we recognize that the absence of dedicated BOL policies

may contribute to a lack of consistency and/or frustration with the lack of direction

(Thurab-Nkhosi, 2018).

Subsequently, we offer a secondary recommendation for future research that targets

in-depth research on the nine themes we addressed in our analysis: academic integrity,

accessibility, assessments, cybersecurity, framework development, professional development and

support, student engagement and support, technology, and terminology. Throughout our research

brief, we discussed the broad implications of these themes and how they can be implemented



Alarakyia-Jivani et al./ Emerging Perspectives (2024) 12

into BOL policy development. Yet, more research is necessary to provide specific

recommendations regarding each of these themes so policymakers have access to in-depth

analysis for appropriate policy implementation. This is especially pertinent as BOL policy

development is under-researched due to policy research focusing separately on online learning

(Rajabalee & Santally, 2021) and blended learning (Ashraf et al., 2021; Oleshko et al., 2022).

Our third recommendation relates to consistency in the process and formation of BOL

policies across different faculties within higher education institutions. This uniformity should

reflect consistent terminology used in each policy to ensure stakeholders are clear about each

aspect of BOL policies and what those terms mean. Institutions may also benefit from dedicating

sufficient resources to support stakeholders during the development and implementation of BOL

policies and emphasize transparency of these policies with stakeholders. Regarding consistency,

it would be helpful for the U15 organization to provide clear frameworks guiding BOL policies

to ensure consistency across these institutions.

Throughout these recommendations, it is critical to recognize that the nine considerations

for a BOL policy framework we discuss here should be adapted to each institution's unique

circumstances. Before implementation, the institution's administration and stakeholders should

review and approve these policies before implementation. As mentioned above, we underscore

the importance of committees supporting programs, educators, and students through resources,

tutorials, and training. Finally, a clear plan for evaluating and assessing BOL policies is

pertinent, alongside addressing challenges for any stakeholders who implement or execute the

policy.

Conclusion



Alarakyia-Jivani et al./ Emerging Perspectives (2024) 13

BOL requires cohesive policy development at U15s, which we uncovered through two

environmental scans. These institutions must address the key themes of academic integrity,

accessibility, assessments, cybersecurity, framework development, professional development and

support, student engagement and support, technology, and terminology in future BOL policy

creation. Further, key discussion points that examine the gaps in research regarding BOL, the

importance of consistency within BOL policies, and the regular assessment and updating of these

policies are all important considerations and avenues for future research. Ultimately, this review

is a launching point into the importance and complexity of BOL policies to ensure that all higher

education stakeholders receive the best experiences within BOL environments.



Alarakyia-Jivani et al./ Emerging Perspectives (2024) 14

References

Accessibility (n.d.) Dalhousie University. Retrieved October 24, 2022, from

https://www.dal.ca/dept/online-teaching/accessibility.html

Ashraf, M. A., Yang, M., Zhang, Y., Denden, M., Tlili, A., Liu, J., Huang, R., & Burgos, D.

(2021). A systematic review of systematic reviews on blended learning: Trends, gaps and

future directions. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 14, 1525-1541.

https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S331741

Bhagat, S., & Kim, D. J. (2020). Higher education amidst COVID-19: Challenges and silver

Lining. Information Systems Management, 37(4), 366-371.

https://doi.org/10.1080/10580530.2020.1824040

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in

Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Centre for Teaching and Learning. (2019). eLearning strategy. Dalhousie University. Retrieved

October 24, 2022, from https://www.dal.ca/dept/clt/e-learning/elearning_strategy.html

Christians, D. (n.d.). How online leadership is changing in higher education. TechSmith.

https://www.techsmith.com/blog/online-leadership-education/

Coman, C., Țîru, L. G., Meseșan-Schmitz, L., Stanciu, C., & Bularca, M. C. (2020). Online

teaching and learning in higher education during the coronavirus pandemic: Students’

perspective. Sustainability, 12(24), Article 10367. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU122410367

Cote, A., & White, A. (2020, December 20). Higher education for lifelong learners: A roadmap

for Ontario post-secondary leaders and policymakers. Ontario 360.

https://on360.ca/policy-papers/higher-education-for-lifelong-learners-a-roadmap-for-onta

rio-post-secondary-leaders-and-policymakers/

https://www.dal.ca/dept/online-teaching/accessibility.html
https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S331741
https://doi.org/10.1080/10580530.2020.1824040
https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
https://www.dal.ca/dept/clt/e-learning/elearning_strategy.html
https://www.techsmith.com/blog/online-leadership-education/
https://doi.org/10.3390/SU122410367
https://on360.ca/policy-papers/higher-education-for-lifelong-learners-a-roadmap-for-ontario-post-secondary-leaders-and-policymakers/


Alarakyia-Jivani et al./ Emerging Perspectives (2024) 15

Delaney, J. G. (2017). Education policy: Bridging the divide between theory and practice (2nd

ed.). Brush Education.

Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman.

Garrett, R., Simunich, B., Legon, R., & Fredericksen, E. E. (2021). CHLOE 6: Online learning

leaders adapt for a post-pandemic world. Quality Matters.

https://www.qualitymatters.org/qa-resources/resource-center/articles-resources/CHLOE-

6-report-2021

Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential

in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95–105.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001

Graham, C. R. (2006). Blended learning systems: Definition, current trends and future directions.

In C. J. Bonk & C. R. Graham (Eds.), The handbook of blended learning: Global

perspectives, local designs (pp. 3–21). Pfeiffer.

Herron, J., Lashley, J., Salley, W., & Shaw, M. (n.d.). The Chief Online Learning Officer:

Competencies, roles, and trajectories. Unbound. https://unbound.upcea.edu/online-

2/online-education/the-chief-online-learning-officer-competencies-roles-and-trajectories/

Hrastinski, S. (2019). What do we mean by blended learning? TechTrends, 63(5), 564–569.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-019-00375-5

King, E., & Alperstein, N. (2017). Best practices in planning strategically for online

educational programs. Routledge.

Lim, C. P., Wang, T., & Graham, C. (2019). Driving, sustaining, and scaling up blended learning

practices in higher education institutions: A proposed framework. Innovation and

Education, 1(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42862-019-0002-0

https://www.qualitymatters.org/qa-resources/resource-center/articles-resources/CHLOE-6-report-2021
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001
https://unbound.upcea.edu/online-2/online-education/the-chief-online-learning-officer-competencies-roles-and-trajectories/
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-019-00375-5
https://doi.org/10.1186/s42862-019-0002-0


Alarakyia-Jivani et al./ Emerging Perspectives (2024) 16

Moore, J. L., Dickson-Deane, C., & Galyen, K. (2011). e-Learning, online learning, and distance

learning environments: Are they the same? The Internet and Higher Education, 14(2),

129-135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.10.001

Oleshko, A., Sliusareva, L., & Budіakova, О. (2022). Sociological context of higher education

blended learning policy. Public Administration and Law Review, (4), 4-15.

https://doi.org/10.36690/2674-5216-2022-4-4

Pal, L. A. (2006). Beyond policy analysis: Public issue management in turbulent times (3rd ed.).

Nelson Educated Limited.

Policies and procedures (n.d.). University of British Columbia. Retrieved October 24, 2022,

from https://distancelearning.ubc.ca/learner-support/policies-and-procedures/

Rajabalee, Y. B., & Santally, M. I. (2021). Learner satisfaction, engagement, and performances in

an online module: Implications for institutional e-learning policy. Education and

Information Technologies, 26(3), 2623-2656.

School of Graduate Studies (2022). Guidelines for online learning in graduate academic

programs. University of Toronto. Retrieved October 24, 2022, from

https://www.sgs.utoronto.ca/policies-guidelines/online-learning-guidelines/

Singh, V., & Thurman, A. (2019). How many ways can we define online learning? A systematic

literature review of definitions of online learning (1988-2018). American Journal of

Distance Education, 33(4), 289-306. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2019.1663082

Student Success Centre. (n.d.). Online learning support. McMaster University. Retrieved

October 24, 2022, from

https://studentsuccess.mcmaster.ca/writing-and-academic-skills/online-learning/

Thurab-Nkhosi, D. (2018). Implementing a blended/online learning policy on a face-to-face

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.10.001
https://doi.org/10.36690/2674-5216-2022-4-4
https://distancelearning.ubc.ca/learner-support/policies-and-procedures/
https://www.sgs.utoronto.ca/policies-guidelines/online-learning-guidelines/
https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2019.1663082
https://studentsuccess.mcmaster.ca/writing-and-academic-skills/online-learning/


Alarakyia-Jivani et al./ Emerging Perspectives (2024) 17

campus: Perspectives of administrators and implications for change. Journal of Learning

for Development, 5(2), 133-147.

University of British Columbia. (n.d.). Distance learning policies and procedures.

https://distancelearning.ubc.ca/learner-support/policies-and-procedures/

University of British Columbia. (n.d.). ECPS guidelines for approval, development, and staffing

of online courses.

https://ecps.educ.ubc.ca/internal/policies-procedures/ecps-guidelines-for-approval-develo

pment-and-staffing-of-online-courses/

U15 Group of Canadian Research Universities. (2016, March 22). Budget 2016: A strong

commitment to scientific research.

https://u15.ca/publications/statements-releases/budget-2016-a-strong-commitment-to-scie

ntific-research/

University Technology Services. (n.d.). Technology resources for McMaster students.McMaster

University. Retrieved October 24, 2022, from https://uts.mcmaster.ca/technology-

resources-for-mcmaster-students/#tab-content-it-security

https://distancelearning.ubc.ca/learner-support/policies-and-procedures/
https://u15.ca/publications/statements-releases/budget-2016-a-strong-commitment-to-scientific-research/
https://u15.ca/publications/statements-releases/budget-2016-a-strong-commitment-to-scientific-research/
https://u15.ca/publications/statements-releases/budget-2016-a-strong-commitment-to-scientific-research/
https://uts.mcmaster.ca/technology-resources-for-mcmaster-students/#tab-content-it-security


Alarakyia-Jivani et al./ Emerging Perspectives (2024) 18

Appendix A

Key Considerations for BOL Policy Development


