Page 160 - BLENDED LEARNING

In the next version (v3) of the course we experimented with screencasting (SC),
which is a short video of your computer’s screen with a recorded commentary as
you move around and (in this case) make changes to a text. It was initially developed
as a way to make short explanatory videos for users of software, and was seen
as an alternative to reading an instruction booklet. We saw an opportunity to use
this tool as a way of giving feedback on writing. We felt that we could give more
interesting feedback on participants’ writing in this way by manipulating their text
while we talked about it, as opposed to pen on paper, or inserted comments in Word
documents, as we had done previously.

The participants were sent a weekly email outlining activities for the week (based on
a needs analysis). The tasks were opportunities to self-study on selected websites,
which were thematically linked to texts from their self-study books. In addition, they
were asked to send a piece of writing from their daily work tasks. The rubric stated
simply: send a work-related piece of writing that you’d like feedback on (no more
than 500 words). In return, a few days later, participants were sent an email with a
link to their screencast, and were provided with links to websites where learners
could read about, or practise, a certain linguistic area that had emerged as a
potential focus. Individual follow-up work like this was suggested after each piece of
submitted writing. We developed a checklist that tutors could use to track progress,
and reflected the taught content in v2. This checklist offered learners another
modality; if the audio and video feedback were not clear it also aided record keeping
and standardisation between tutors. This initial experiment was successful and
screencasting was then incorporated more fully into the blend in the next version.

Table 1: Satisfaction with progress after six weeks of v3
Very Quite Neither Quite Very Don’t know
satisfied satisfied dissatisfied dissatisfied
Writing 6 8 3 2 0 0
Grammar 4 5 2 4 0 4
Listening 3 3 8 1 1 2
Reading 2 5 4 2 0 6

The next CBEC (v4) had less face-to-face time, perhaps due to the greater efficiency
of the course, and was just 36 hours long, spread over 12 weeks and included six
screencasts (one every fortnight) which were incorporated as a way of giving feedback
on assessed tasks. In this course one major drawback of using screencasts in this way
was that it did not naturally set up a conversation about the text in question. It often led
to moves resembling the following: trainer sets task, participant responds, trainer gives
feedback. Although these moves are beneficial, they also replicate more traditional
(input–output) procedures of the teaching/learning process.

The important methodological change in v5 was that screencasts would deliver
formative feedback that could be implemented as learners worked towards
producing a final piece, in a portfolio of their writing. This move towards portfolio
assessment matches much best practice in assessment where the focus is on
assessment for learning, rather than assessment of learning (Li, 2010). The global

156 | A longitudinal case study of the ‘blends’ A longitudinal case study of the ‘blends’ | 157