Page 41 - BLENDED LEARNING

What we blend
By 1993 we were already fairly grounded in the communicative language teaching
(CLT) pedagogy (Dudley-Evans, 1984; Bloor and St John, 1988; Hyland and Hyland,
1992). The requirements of this approach drew us to look for alternative methods
of course delivery beyond the constraints of the face-to-face teacher-fronted,
rote learning mode. The courses were already task- and skills-based, adopting
the process-product and problem-based approaches. We had students working in
collaborative groups to carry out investigations (for example on HIV/AIDS or climate
change) and to write term papers. What remained was to enable learners to do more
on their own, to help teachers be able to give more support by giving more frequent
feedback and providing links to diverse materials and sources and, especially, to
create avenues for greater interaction amongst learners in the target language.
GNS 102, for example, followed a seven-stage process up until the writing of the
term paper, and each stage had a number of steps with varied tasks: 1) raising
awareness of language use, 2) choosing a topic, 3) sourcing for materials, 4)
structuring the essay, 5) drafting the essay, 6) writing references, 7) using checklists.
All of the stages, except 5, start off in an face-to-face meeting, presenting and
explaining the ideas and principles. Tasks and samples of good practice are set,
but are only available online. However, most tasks are carried out at group meetings,
while answers are uploaded onto the learning site. Stage 5 takes place basically
online on the groups’ wiki pages but a sample writing of the introductory paragraph
using ‘moves’ begins in the classroom. Students have the opportunity at face-to-face
meetings to debate, brainstorm and raise queries on aspects of each stage while
collaborating and communicating on their group tasks out of class. Online work
extends students’ working hours; enables flexibility of work mode and variety of
work styles. Equally important is the opportunity this affords to explore materials
the teacher is unable to provide as they investigate their project topics.
We use the face-to-face meetings to build the group teams after explaining and
debating the course rationale, goals and learning outcomes. Also important is giving
an explanation on how the online component integrates and works. Each stage of
the course and the expectations are clarified. Feedback is given on issues around
the tasks that students carry out. On the Moodle VLE the learning materials are
available for download; links to other sites with useful materials are provided (a
regular one is www.uefap.com); a news forum is provided enabling teachers to post
information regularly, and a course discussion forum enables learners to share ideas,
ask questions and discuss their progress on the course. Students collaborate on the
group wiki pages to share information on meeting times and draft/edit their term
paper; students are also encouraged to use micro-blogs on their profile pages to
reflect on their learning and record ideas they have gained which they might like
to develop later. The totality of the blend is a learning experience that has kept
students engaged, interacting in English and interested in learning like they never
have been before.

Figure 1 presents the evaluation of a first semester 2010 –11 session for GNS
101 using the Constructivist On-Line Learning Environment Survey (COLLES).
The format of the survey questionnaire requires the respondent to indicate a

38 | Blended learning in English for Academic Purposes courses Blended learning in English for Academic Purposes courses | 39