Blended Learning in English Language Teaching: Course Design and Implementation
Blended Learning in English Language Teaching: Course Design and Implementation
Blended Learning in English Language Teaching: Course Design and Implementation
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
To achieve a ‘pr<strong>in</strong>cipled approach’ to blended learn<strong>in</strong>g Sharma <strong>and</strong> Barrett<br />
(2007: 13 –14) suggest the follow<strong>in</strong>g four guid<strong>in</strong>g pr<strong>in</strong>ciples:<br />
1. Firstly, they advise you to ‘separate the role of the teacher <strong>and</strong> the role of<br />
technology’ as the roles are not <strong>in</strong>terchangeable, but they are complementary.<br />
2. Secondly, ‘teach <strong>in</strong> a pr<strong>in</strong>cipled way’ us<strong>in</strong>g means that best suit the learners’<br />
needs, i.e. pedagogically driven.<br />
3. Thirdly, ‘use technology to complement <strong>and</strong> enhance F2F teach<strong>in</strong>g’ mean<strong>in</strong>g that<br />
the two modes should complement each other, <strong>and</strong> which seems to suggest that<br />
face-to-face is exclusively the lead mode.<br />
4. Lastly, ‘It’s not so much the program, more what you do with it’ (Jones, 1986).<br />
To illustrate this f<strong>in</strong>al statement three examples of how to use a CD-ROM are<br />
given, from an <strong>in</strong>dividual us<strong>in</strong>g it alone at home, to follow up practice <strong>in</strong> self-study<br />
or at home after a class, to actually us<strong>in</strong>g it <strong>in</strong> class as part of a presentation.<br />
Dudeney <strong>and</strong> Hockly (2007: 138 –139) refer to a blended learn<strong>in</strong>g course where<br />
75 per cent is delivered onl<strong>in</strong>e <strong>and</strong> 25 per cent face-to-face <strong>in</strong> their list of three<br />
possible course designs for onl<strong>in</strong>e learn<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> language learn<strong>in</strong>g environments:<br />
■■ A 100 per cent onl<strong>in</strong>e language learn<strong>in</strong>g course, where the course is not unlike<br />
a coursebook onl<strong>in</strong>e.<br />
■■ A blended language learn<strong>in</strong>g course, where 75 per cent is delivered onl<strong>in</strong>e <strong>and</strong><br />
25 per cent face-to-face.<br />
■■ A face-to-face language learn<strong>in</strong>g course with additional onl<strong>in</strong>e materials, where<br />
onl<strong>in</strong>e tools are used to support <strong>and</strong> extend face-to-face lessons.<br />
Personally, I question how helpful it is to def<strong>in</strong>e the terms us<strong>in</strong>g percentages as I<br />
believe these figures can vary widely from those given yet still the course could be<br />
def<strong>in</strong>ed as a blended learn<strong>in</strong>g course. Moreover, I would refer to their third example<br />
as a blended learn<strong>in</strong>g course too, with the difference be<strong>in</strong>g that the face-to-face<br />
mode is the lead mode <strong>in</strong> that blend. This, it could be argued, highlights the difficulty<br />
of def<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g blended learn<strong>in</strong>g that was referred to earlier <strong>in</strong> this chapter. Prior to<br />
design<strong>in</strong>g the three onl<strong>in</strong>e learn<strong>in</strong>g courses listed above Dudeney <strong>and</strong> Hockly (2007)<br />
recommend that the designer answers a series of questions which operate rather like<br />
a checklist. These are categorised under five head<strong>in</strong>gs: delivery mode, task design<br />
<strong>and</strong> materials, learners, teachers/tutors, assessment <strong>and</strong> evaluation.<br />
Banados (2006) provides us with an extremely <strong>in</strong>formative study <strong>in</strong>to a work<strong>in</strong>g<br />
model of blended learn<strong>in</strong>g used to teach <strong>English</strong> <strong>in</strong> the Universidad de Concepción<br />
(UdeC), Chile, which considers the design at course level rather than lesson level.<br />
The course is comprised of four elements, which are:<br />
a. Learners’ <strong>in</strong>dependent work on a dedicated platform with the UdeC <strong>English</strong><br />
Onl<strong>in</strong>e software.<br />
b. Face-to-face <strong>English</strong> as a foreign language (EFL) classes led by teachers who<br />
are also students’ onl<strong>in</strong>e tutors.<br />
c. Onl<strong>in</strong>e monitor<strong>in</strong>g carried out by these teachers.<br />
d. Weekly conversation classes with native speakers of <strong>English</strong>.<br />
Introduction | 17