Blended Learning in English Language Teaching: Course Design and Implementation

Recommendations

Info

What are the limiting factors? Although not directly referred to in the case studies there are indications that this question was considered, especially when it came to choosing software. For example, Eydelman (Chapter 3) was constrained by costs; as there was no budget for software the choice was limited to what was free. In my context sustainability was a key consideration so the design had to reflect this and the courses had to be cost-effective to run and maintain once the financial support from stakeholders had been removed. This had an impact on the materials we chose and the number of computers that we purchased. There was also no internet connection in our language centres, which significantly limited the software that was available to us. 2. Course design The second stage in the design process can commence once you have familiarised yourself with your context, determined what your reasons for blending are and identified the limiting factors. Armed with this information and having determined that a blended approach is appropriate for your context the design stage can begin and the next set of questions can be addressed. What are you going to blend? The definitions of blended learning in ELT given in the introductory chapter all refer to a combination of two modes, face-to-face and technology – computer assisted language learning (CALL), or online. These two modes were incorporated in all the blends described, with the authors choosing a variety of software for the online component, with Moodle being the most popular choice (see Table 4). The decision on what software to use was often influenced by the level of institutional infrastructure and support, so for example Gilbert (Chapter 1) chose Moodle because it was the University’s official Course Management System and Pardo-Gonzalez (Chapter 4) chose Wimba because ‘it suited our needs and allowed us to further develop the English program without becoming programmers or engineers.’ Table 4: Software choices for the technology mode Software Author and Chapter Moodle Gilbert (Chapter 1); Aborisade (Chapter 2); Peachey (Chapter 5); Dudeney and Hockly (Chapter 6); Bo and O’Hare (Chapter 7); Hirst and Godfrey (Chapter 9) PBWorks Eydelman (Chapter 3); Ingham (Chapter 15) Wimba Pardo-Gonzalez (Chapter 4) A VLE e.g. Moodle or Blackboard White et al. (Chapter 8) Pearson Fronter Douglas and Paton (Chapter 10) Mobile phones Kern (Chapter 11) Posterous Kern (Chapter 11) Flash Beagle and Davies (Chapter 12) Email Keedwell (Chapter 13); Russell (Chapter 14) Screencasts Russell (Chapter 14) Reward CD-ROMs Whittaker (Chapter 16) Conclusion | 229
Software Author and Chapter New Learners in the New Europe framework 230 | Conclusion Sokol et al. (Chapter 17) Macmillan English Campus Bilgin (Chapter 19); Krake (Chapter 20) Internet Gilbert (Chapter 1); Pardo-Gonzalez (Chapter 4) Creating a site called New Generation (wiki) Fleet (Chapter 18) No reference is made to the possibility of a third mode, self-study, which played a significant role in the blend I describe in Chapter 16. We were fortunate enough to have well-equipped and resourced self-study rooms with numerous books, graded readers, language CDs and videos, etc., from the original blend so this mode remained an integral part of the design of the resultant blend. Therefore I would consider self-study as a potential third mode to the design of any blend. What is the lead mode going to be? In 16 of the 20 blends described in this publication, the face-to-face mode was the lead mode, which I find unsurprising as I believe that an existing face-to-face course is most commonly the starting point for developing a blend. The four blends that did not comply to this apparent norm are Peachey (Chapter 5) whose blend starts with eight weeks/80 hours of tutor-moderated online delivery; Dudeney and Hockly (Chapter 6) with a one-week online orientation period (although they state that the course ‘officially starts with the face-to-face component’) so I might have taken a liberty here suggesting it started with the online mode; Douglas and Paton (Chapter 10) and Beagle and Davies (Chapter 12), whose courses are both predominantly online with very little in the way of a face-to-face mode. Which mode will set the pace? Being able to work at your own pace is given as one of the reasons for blending, but at the same time on certain courses I believe the pace needs to be set in order to cover the syllabus in the allocated time. In the Bosnia and Herzegovina blend the lead mode was the face-to-face mode and this regulated the pacing of the course by ensuring that all the learners covered the core material at the same time in class before the follow-up extension activities that they could then complete at their own pace on the computers or in self-study. How much time will the learners spend on each mode? Most of the authors state the amount of time that was spent on the face-to- face mode, yet are less explicit about the time spent on the online mode. This could be because the learners determine how much time they dedicate to that mode, and/or because in some instances this mode is optional (Ingham, Chapter 15; Fleet, Chapter 18). The most information is provided by Peachey (Chapter 5), Dudeney and Hockly (Chapter 6) and White et al. (Chapter 8) as their blends are delivered in ‘blocks’ (my terminology) where one mode of delivery appears to be used for each block, rather than both modes being used simultaneously for teaching and learning purposes (see Table 5).
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 and 204: Conclusion Claire Whittaker
Page 205 and 206: Table 1: Neumeier’s (2005) framew
Page 207: Reasons given in the literature for
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?