Blended Learning in English Language Teaching: Course Design and Implementation

There was a steady increase in the amount of class time spent covering military
English from elementary to upper-intermediate, accompanied by a decrease in the
amount of time dedicated to general English (see Figure 3). Moreover, at higher levels
there was less class time and more computer and self-study time as the belief was
that students at these levels were capable of a higher degree of autonomy, especially
if they had attended the preceding courses which should have prepared them in
some way for it. Despite these changes there was still a high degree of ‘horizontal
integration’ where there is ‘some continuity in learning tools across programs and
courses as [this] is clearly advantageous from the student’s point of view’ (Levy and
Stockwell, 2006: 30).
Figure 3: Hours per week spent in the modes
25
20
15
10
5
0
Methodology
180 | A military blend
Self-study Computer
Class – Military English Class – General English
Elementary
Pre-intermediate
Intermediate
Upper
intermediate
One of blended learning’s strengths is the methodological variety that the different
modes can provide. In our blend the general English coursebooks supported
the largely communicative approach to language teaching and learning that we
advocated with elements of task-based and problem-based learning being provided
by the military English coursebooks. Problem-based learning is a relatively new
methodology to ELT and it allows ‘students to work together in order to find solutions
to real world problems’ (Boyle and Mellor-Clarke, 2006: 3) which are situated in their
professional field and to which there are no fixed solutions. Self-study promoted a
type of autonomous learning where the primary objective was that learners were
‘engaged in self-directed work’ Littlewood (1996: 433). However, a criticism may be
levelled at the design of this mode as the choice of materials was prescribed apart
from the ‘free choice’ session on Fridays. This in essence restricted the learners’
level of autonomy, if autonomy is defined as ‘the ability to take charge of one’s own
learning’ (Holec cited in Benson, 2006: 22). A number of relatively simple changes
could be made to the design to amend this, such as increasing the number of tasks
within each self-study strand and by including more ‘free-choice’ strands.