Blended Learning in English Language Teaching: Course Design and Implementation

their own style of learning. At their most effective, they are practically useful for
participants and they serve a valuable function in reinforcing the social ties of
the group.
Thirdly, the simulation generates a lot of involvement. For one thing it is high stakes
(the culminating assignment depends on content from the simulation), while for
another there are social pressures among each team which encourage active
participation, since letting down the team is something which most participants wish
to avoid. In many ways, the simulation is the most productive of the blended learning
activities used on the course. Or, as one participant put it, ‘The simulation was also a
fantastic way to bring everything together’.
Administration
Blended learning gives rise to a number of administration demands. In a programme
such as IDLTM, the trainers are employed on a freelance basis, and only the course
manager and administrator are full-time employees of the provider institution. This
means that, in effect, the trainers, who will usually be widely dispersed, are service
providers and they are paid fixed rates according to specified teaching hours to be
devoted to both the face-to-face and online phases of the course, so guaranteeing
uniformity of trainer commitment is a challenge.
Trainers are recruited on the basis of their subject expertise, but among any
group there is diversity of experience of blended learning pedagogy, expectations
and commitment. In turn, this gives rise to a need for trainer training and the
exchange of good practice among members of the teaching team. At best, this can
be arranged during the face-to-face phase, under the guidance of the lead trainer
who is, however, one among equals and has limited authority to direct such training
or to invoke any sanctions in the event of under-performance by other trainers.
Because of the tight scheduling and sequencing of the IDLTM programme,
establishing and maintaining routines, meeting deadlines and record keeping are
vital for the effective management of the course. While the importance of efficient
course management is not confined to blended learning, because the blend in this
case is based on online work and participation among a geographically dispersed
group of candidates, the effectiveness of such a blended learning programme is
highly dependent on effective co-ordination and administration.
Conclusion
The IDLTM model of blended learning is successful when judged from the high
retention rate – 92 per cent on the ICTE-UQ courses – and satisfaction levels.
On the basis of the IDLTM experience, some guiding principles and practical
considerations emerge which may have implications for blended learning
provision beyond this particular case.
Firstly, there is the role, reliability and accessibility of the platform for the blended
learning components. Heinze and Procter (2004) consider student concerns over
technical issues with the VLE as one the perceived weaknesses of blended learning,
while the importance of both teacher and student training in the use of blended
Blended learning: The IDLTM experience | 97