Blended Learning in English Language Teaching: Course Design and Implementation

Recommendations

Info

Conclusion In this chapter a list of blended learning design-related questions will be presented for course designers to consider when developing their courses. The questions have arisen from the advice on blended learning course design that is presented in the literature and from the experiences of the authors in this publication, including my own. The questions will be presented under four headings (context; course design; learners, teachers and tutors; and evaluating and developing the blend), with examples drawn from the case studies providing suggested answers or guidance for each. A principled approach to blended learning course design The Introduction to this book concluded by stressing the importance of getting the blend ‘right’, whilst at the same time acknowledging that ‘determining the right blend isn’t easy or to be taken lightly’ (Hofmann, 2001: 3). Despite these words of warning the literature provides us with a limited amount of advice on how to blend and simply suggests that we approach it in a principled way (Neumeier, 2005; Levy and Stockwell, 2006; Sharma, 2006; Mayes and de Freitas, 2007) because if we do not ‘a course … may be seen as an “eclectic” blending together of course components and can end up as rather a mish-mash’ Sharma and Barrett (2007: 8). Therefore, to ensure that this does not happen and to achieve a principled approach to design in relation to English Language Teaching (ELT), Sharma and Barrett (2007) suggest that course designers follow four guiding principles (outlined in the Introduction). Also Dudeney and Hockly (2007) propose a list of questions under five headings (delivery mode; task design and materials; learners; teacher/tutors; assessment and evaluation), which acts as a checklist of key considerations, but does not suggest answers or provide examples from blends. Although helpful to a degree, when I was redesigning the Bosnia and Herzegovina blend (Chapter 16) I did not find this advice detailed enough to guide me and moreover I was frustrated by the lack of descriptions of blends in ELT contexts. It was rather belatedly in the redesign process that I discovered Neumeier’s (2005) framework of parameters, which originated from the design of a 33-hour job application course in a German university (see Table 1). The aim of this short course (73 per cent of which was taught online) was to teach the students how to apply for a job in English and the course’s primary focus was on writing (CVs and covering letters) and to a lesser degree speaking (interviews). Neumeier (2005: 176) hoped this framework could act as the starting point for designing a blended learning environment for language teaching and learning, and that it would ‘help course designers and practitioners to move closer to answering the initial question of which combination provides the optimal basis for language learning and teaching given the particular conditions at hand.’ Conclusion | 225
Table 1: Neumeier’s (2005) framework Parameter Individual descriptors 1. Mode (typically face-to-face and CALL) • Focus on mode 226 | Conclusion • Distribution of modes • Choice of modes 2. Model of integration • Sequencing of individual modes 3. Distribution of learning content and objectives and assignment of purpose • Level of integration • Parallel or isolated 4. Language teaching methods • Use of teaching methods in each of the modes employed 5. Involvement of learning subjects (students, tutors and teachers) • Interactional patterns: individual vs collaborative language learning activity • Variety of teacher and learner roles • Level of autonomy 6. Location • Classroom, home, outdoors, computer room, institutional settings Other authors recommend that course designers approach the design process in stages. Beetham and Sharpe (2007: 7), for example suggest a four-step process: ■■ Investigation – who are my users and what do they need? What principles and theories are relevant? ■■ Application – how should these principles be applied in this case? ■■ Representation or modelling – what solution will best meet users’ needs? ■■ Iteration – how useful is it in practice? What changes are needed? Another example is provided by Jones (2007) cited in Gruba and Hinkelman (2012: 30) who suggests that designers consider ‘an educational programme as a three-part structure that operates on a micro, meso and macro level’, within which the designer has different considerations at each level. Faced with this range of differing advice on how to approach blended learning course design, which is not always as accessible, comprehensive or practical as it could be, it is challenging for a designer to know where to begin. With this in mind I will draw on the advice given in the literature, largely though not exclusively from Neumeier’s (2005) framework, and supplement it with supporting evidence from the case studies in this book. In recognition of Beetham and Sharpe’s (2007) stages I will organise it under four headings: 1. Context 2. Course design 3. Learners, teachers and tutors 4. Evaluating and developing the blend.
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 and 136:
latest, most secure and flexible pr
Page 137 and 138:
not so much for language improvemen
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: Conclusion Claire Whittaker
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?