Blended Learning in English Language Teaching: Course Design and Implementation

Recommendations

Info

13 Blended learning for English for Occupational Purposes: No frills, soft skills, gaps filled Andy Keedwell Background While definitions differ, it is generally agreed that blended learning involves an effective combination of different modes of delivery, models of teaching and styles of learning (Procter, 2003: 3). Staker and Horn (2012: 3) make a helpful distinction between online delivery of content and instruction (with a degree of student control) and delivery at a ‘bricks and mortar location away from home’. However, a common misconception of blended learning is that it implies large-scale, international programmes, designed by a centralised expert unit, with cohort upon cohort of students studying general English. I will describe here an alternative in which blended learning was used as a small-scale, delicate tool to reach a specialist market through highly-targeted materials developed locally and delivered in a comparatively low-tech way. To some extent, this account is of historical interest as the programme was designed in 2003 and delivered 2004 – 05, in Armenia, where the concept of learning in any way other than face-to-face was very new. Armenia has changed rapidly since then and so is receptive to an online element of learning, as shown by the range of nonface-to-face courses on offer there today. Nevertheless, I hope that some of the lessons learned from programme design and delivery might be of use to others. Blended learning described here was implemented by the British Council, which did not begin to engage fully with Armenia until 2002– 03, unlike elsewhere in Eastern Europe. As a new, ambitious British Council centre, we were approached by the Armenian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (AMFA) to support language upgrading for diplomatic staff. AMFA did not have any resources of its own to support this but, in terms of relationship building, it made a great deal of sense for the British Council in Armenia to meet the request. As ELT Support Manager (the sole member of a small staff to deal with English) I opened discussions with the very co-operative AMFA Liaison Officer. Assessing needs Some aspects of course design were straightforward. A target audience of 40 junior diplomats who served regularly on overseas missions, with a serviceable B1+/B2 level of English, was quickly identified. Needs analysis showed that the need was Blended learning for English for occupational purposes | 147
not so much for language improvement but training in the soft skills of a) delivering presentations/briefings and b) producing reports. I faced, however, a number of challenges. As professionals, trainees spent considerable time out of the country in locations ranging from Minsk to Riga to Bangkok. This precluded regular standard course delivery. Secondly, as a project manager with a wide, varied portfolio (and a relatively small budget), I could not commit to regular classroom teaching. Neither was there a pool of local teachers on whom to draw: one of my roles was to enhance teacher skills to a point at which there would be. Blended learning, therefore, was not just a good idea but a necessity. Rationale for course design The AMFA requested soft skills training, in particular report-writing and presentationdelivery. An often subtle mix of language and skills, this type of training delivery is located on that intriguing, vast and sometimes forgotten branch of Hutchinson and Water’s ESP tree as English for Occupational Purposes (Hutchinson and Waters, 1987: 13) or perhaps more helpfully, English for the world of work. Content of such a course needs to directly target workplace needs and both AMFA administration and the trainer agreed that the focus of training should not be on the language itself but what could be done with the language. Looking at genre Like many course-designers, I find it useful to think in terms of genre, generic features and generic moves: identification of, and hands-on practice by, generic features by learners seems to me to provide a common-sense rather than a theoretical route to enable novice writers/speakers to handle the discourse they aspire to use effectively. In our context, ‘presentations’ and ‘reports’ are often very loosely-used terms which cover a wide variety of genres and one challenge to the course designer is to determine which specific generic features are of relevance. However, I would argue that both genres have a great deal in common, a fact which nicely lends itself to course design. Discussion and needs analysis showed the target group would be expected to: ■■ give briefings/produce reports to highlight information which had been gathered in some way ■■ describe how that information had been identified ■■ outline what should be done based on that information. Topped and tailed with introduction and conclusion, this gave a familiar generic structure for both oral and written forms of: I Introduction M Methodology F Findings R Recommendations C Conclusion 148 | Blended learning for English for occupational purposes
Page 1 and 2:
Blended Learning in English Languag
Page 3 and 4:
ISBN 978-0-86355-706-4 © British C
Page 5 and 6:
Part 3 - English for Specific Purpo
Page 7 and 8:
Acknowledgements We would like to t
Page 9 and 10:
To address this deficit I proposed
Page 11 and 12:
Introduction This introductory chap
Page 13 and 14:
an almost identical definition in h
Page 15 and 16:
■■ Learners’ expectations - l
Page 17 and 18:
To achieve a ‘principled approach
Page 19 and 20:
its weakness in speaking.’ Contra
Page 21 and 22:
References Adair-Hauck, B Willingha
Page 23 and 24:
Rossett, A, Douglis, F and Frazee,
Page 25 and 26:
1 A collaborative online reading an
Page 27 and 28:
engaging approach to teaching, wher
Page 29 and 30:
page evaluation strategies, and col
Page 31 and 32:
Conclusion Students received course
Page 33 and 34:
2 Blended learning in English for A
Page 35 and 36:
All in the blend Reports on the app
Page 37 and 38:
level of agreement or disagreement
Page 39 and 40:
Hyland, K and Hyland, F (1992) Go f
Page 41 and 42:
Why blend? The decision to offer th
Page 43 and 44:
to complete during the before, whil
Page 45 and 46:
In addition, there are a number of
Page 47 and 48:
Turgut, Y (2009) ‘EFL learners’
Page 49 and 50:
■■ English for Academic Purpose
Page 51 and 52:
Figure 1: Stages of the incorporati
Page 53 and 54:
Table 3: Schedule for Unit 1 Week U
Page 55 and 56:
Internet - links and WebQuests: Som
Page 57 and 58:
References Allan, M (1985) Teaching
Page 59 and 60:
My advice to intending EAP course d
Page 61 and 62:
5 A blended learning teacher develo
Page 63 and 64:
The face-to-face element Because of
Page 65 and 66:
ookmarking because social bookmarki
Page 67 and 68:
and instructional design of the onl
Page 69 and 70:
Encourage learner autonomy and refl
Page 71 and 72:
packages, setting up online account
Page 73 and 74:
Clearly there are advantages to hav
Page 75 and 76:
Lessons learned When deciding what
Page 77 and 78:
References Osguthorpe, RT and Graha
Page 79 and 80:
The learner and the context Althoug
Page 81 and 82:
typically involve writing or applyi
Page 83 and 84:
where possible, to bring them toget
Page 85 and 86: 8 Blended learning: The IDLTM exper
Page 87 and 88: learning and characteristics, and k
Page 89 and 90: There is a fourth activity type in
Page 91 and 92: their own style of learning. At the
Page 93 and 94: Garrison, D and Vaughan, ND (2007)
Page 95 and 96: variety of teaching contexts (e.g.
Page 97 and 98: Figure 3: The homepage in a Module
Page 99 and 100: Figure 5: The projects page carries
Page 101 and 102: adding things in response to feedba
Page 103 and 104: Appendix 1 Extract showing first th
Page 105 and 106: ■■ Cambridge ESOL was reporting
Page 107 and 108: ■■ Including later units on, fo
Page 109 and 110: The rationale behind the blend The
Page 111 and 112: Figure 2: An example screen from a
Page 113 and 114: environment and to meet the student
Page 115 and 116: ■■ Fine-tuning of online course
Page 117 and 118: Comments on Part 2 Brian Tomlinson
Page 119 and 120: Learning a new language and reflect
Page 121 and 122: 11 Blended learning: Podcasts for t
Page 123 and 124: to the content (see below). Additio
Page 125 and 126: Making recommendations My friend An
Page 127 and 128: Sustainability Blended learning oft
Page 129 and 130: Kukulska-Hulme, A and Shield, A (20
Page 131 and 132: The face-to-face aspect of the cour
Page 133 and 134: The course covers listening, speaki
Page 135: latest, most secure and flexible pr
Page 139 and 140: the reader/listener as customer) an
Page 141 and 142: 2. ‘Technology is only important
Page 143 and 144: 14 A longitudinal case study of the
Page 145 and 146: In the next version (v3) of the cou
Page 147 and 148: of a blend in Collis and Moonen’s
Page 149 and 150: of telecoms engineers, but it was w
Page 151 and 152: 15 Using a wiki to enhance the lear
Page 153 and 154: The ‘history feature’ which can
Page 155 and 156: Figure 4: Student created listening
Page 157 and 158: Teaching methodology The blended de
Page 159 and 160: Figure 8: Student reaction to probl
Page 161 and 162: Lund, A (2008) Wikis: a collective
Page 163 and 164: hazard a guess that it was over con
Page 165 and 166: the management of the centres would
Page 167 and 168: There was a steady increase in the
Page 169 and 170: 3. User experience - feedback on th
Page 171 and 172: Comments on Part 3 Brian Tomlinson
Page 173 and 174: 17 A thinking-based blended learnin
Page 175 and 176: In each of the above parts, the lea
Page 177 and 178: Figure 1: Cycle of working with gra
Page 179 and 180: Model by JP, Form 10 Structure Mode
Page 181 and 182: Recommendation 2 Ensure that the on
Page 183 and 184: Sokol, A (2008) Development of Inve
Page 185 and 186: Moreover, as a result of increased
Page 187 and 188:
In general, the students remarked t
Page 189 and 190:
19 Students’ CALLing: Blended lan
Page 191 and 192:
The students were taken to the comp
Page 193 and 194:
When considering blended learning,
Page 195 and 196:
Introducing Macmillan English Campu
Page 197 and 198:
In both scenarios, the ratio of con
Page 199 and 200:
attending scenario 1 courses. The o
Page 201 and 202:
Comments on Part 4 Brian Tomlinson
Page 203 and 204:
Conclusion Claire Whittaker
Page 205 and 206:
Table 1: Neumeier’s (2005) framew
Page 207 and 208:
Reasons given in the literature for
Page 209 and 210:
Software Author and Chapter New Lea
Page 211 and 212:
Keedwell’s (Chapter 13) blend on
Page 213 and 214:
Table 7: Learning theories, languag
Page 215 and 216:
What will the interactional pattern
Page 217 and 218:
Whittaker (Chapter 16) believed tha
Page 219 and 220:
Summary This chapter draws on the l
Page 221 and 222:
Appendix 1 - Questions for blended
Page 223 and 224:
Contributors Peter Aborisade lectur
Page 225 and 226:
Jody Gilbert taught in post-seconda
Page 227 and 228:
Juanita Pardo-González (BA Hons in
Page 229:
The British Council is pleased to o
show all

Blended Learning in English Language Teaching: Course Design and Implementation

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?