Page 90 - BLENDED LEARNING

expected to use it appropriately. However, the course design overlooked the fact
that several had never followed an online course before, let alone used a
Moodle platform. It also ignored the importance of online social engagement.
The course was therefore re-designed so that two weeks before the face-to-
face training, participants had a half day introduction to the platform and were
shown how it works. Then, following the first two stages of Salmon’s (2000) five-
stage model, they then had two weeks to build a profile, socialise and do some
background reading for the course.

Summary of Salmon’s (2000) five-stage model
Stage Student activities Tutor activities
Stage 1 • Setting up system and accessing. • Welcome and encouragement.
Access and • Guidance on where to find
motivation technical support.
Stage 2 • Sending and receiving messages. • Introductions.
Online • Ice-breakers.
socialisation • Ground rules.
• Netiquette.
Stage 3 • Carrying out activities. • Facilitate structured activities.
Information • Reporting and discussing findings. • Assign roles and responsibilities.
exchange • Support use of learning materials.
• Encourage discussions.
• Summarise findings and/or
outcomes.
Stage 4 • Conferencing. • Facilitate open activities.
Knowledge • Course-related discussions. • Facilitate the process.
construction • Critical thinking applied to • Asking questions.
subject material. • Encourage reflection.
• Making connections between • Tutor is very active at this stage.
models and work-based
learning experiences.
Stage 5 • Use of conferencing in a • Support.
Development strategic way. • Respond only when required.
• Integration of CMC into other • Encourage reflection.
forms of learning. • Tutor is less active and hands
• Reflection on learning processes. over to the students.
• Students become critical of
the medium.

b. The programme was divided into two stages. As mentioned previously, one
of the reasons for this was to facilitate a ‘transformational blend’, i.e. one that
would achieve a radical change in pedagogy where participants’ attitude to, and
adoption of, communicative testing changes, as well as connecting the learning
with the workplace. Another reason was partly cultural. Chinese teachers, as
mentioned previously, are used to being led in their learning, but also they
are often not allowed to regulate their own time. They often have to react to
last-minute demands of their head teacher, parents, subject leader, or even
colleagues, and it is expected that requests will be seen to immediately. This
meant many participants would fall behind with the online study and assignments.
Several partners would therefore hold informal meetings of the participants,

86 | Reversing the blend: From online to blended Reversing the blend: From online to blended | 87