Pedagogic principles of blended language learning
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Like this? Share it with your network

Share
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
  • i m glad to find it ......
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
5,700
On Slideshare
990
From Embeds
4,710
Number of Embeds
6

Actions

Shares
Downloads
25
Comments
1
Likes
2

Embeds 4,710

http://english360.com 4,701
http://translate.googleusercontent.com 4
http://ranksit.com 2
http://131.253.14.66 1
http://newsblur.com 1
http://www.feedspot.com 1

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide
  • About me and English360, teacher, school owner, e360, e360>consultant, e360>e360.\n\nBE, not classroom-based GE. Instead ESP, personalization, performance-based, 1-1 = dogme, tyranny of the coursebook\n\nGeneralisation issue\n
  • Overview of BE and tech, where it’s going, opportunities with technology.\n\nLots of enthusiasm, blogs, conferences, websites, buzz.\n\nGeneralization issue\nPersonalization\nPerformance based syllabus\n
  • Overview of BE and tech, where it’s going, opportunities with technology.\n\nLots of enthusiasm, blogs, conferences, websites, buzz.\n\nGeneralization issue\nPersonalization\nPerformance based syllabus\n
  • Overview of BE and tech, where it’s going, opportunities with technology.\n\nLots of enthusiasm, blogs, conferences, websites, buzz.\n\nGeneralization issue\nPersonalization\nPerformance based syllabus\n
  • \n
  • Overview of BE and tech, where it’s going, opportunities with technology.\n\nLots of enthusiasm, blogs, conferences, websites, buzz.\n\nGeneralization issue\nPersonalization\nPerformance based syllabus\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • Three things about social:\n1) learning has always been social\n2) classroom is still supreme\n3) \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • Overview of BE and tech, where it’s going, opportunities with technology.\n\nLots of enthusiasm, blogs, conferences, websites, buzz.\n\nGeneralization issue\nPersonalization\nPerformance based syllabus\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • Phaedrus\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • Moving into stage 2: pedagogy > personalization > performance\n\n
  • Moving into stage 2: pedagogy > personalization > performance\n\n
  • Moving into stage 2: pedagogy > personalization > performance\n\n
  • Moving into stage 2: pedagogy > personalization > performance\n\n
  • Overview of BE and tech, where it’s going, opportunities with technology.\n\nLots of enthusiasm, blogs, conferences, websites, buzz.\n\nGeneralization issue\nPersonalization\nPerformance based syllabus\n
  • Task\nCourse\nStrategy\n
  • Task\nCourse\nStrategy\n
  • Task\nCourse\nStrategy\n
  • Task\nCourse\nStrategy\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • Task\nCourse\nStrategy\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • About me and English360, teacher, school owner, e360, e360>consultant, e360>e360.\n\nBE, not classroom-based GE. Instead ESP, personalization, performance-based, 1-1 = dogme, tyranny of the coursebook\n\nSo I developed a open online platform to do all this. This puts me in a quandry, because I’m in the wonderful position where, whatever I believe pedagogically, I can implement in the English360 platform. So there is a one to one correspondence between what I believe as a teacher and the platform. The downside to this is that I can’t talk about my ideas in ELT without it sounding like a sales pitch. So with that pre-emptive caveat let’s get the issues at play here.\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • Task\nCourse\nStrategy\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • About me and English360, teacher, school owner, e360, e360>consultant, e360>e360.\n\nBE, not classroom-based GE. Instead ESP, personalization, performance-based, 1-1 = dogme, tyranny of the coursebook\n\nSo I developed a open online platform to do all this. This puts me in a quandry, because I’m in the wonderful position where, whatever I believe pedagogically, I can implement in the English360 platform. So there is a one to one correspondence between what I believe as a teacher and the platform. The downside to this is that I can’t talk about my ideas in ELT without it sounding like a sales pitch. So with that pre-emptive caveat let’s get the issues at play here.\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • About me and English360, teacher, school owner, e360, e360>consultant, e360>e360.\n\nBE, not classroom-based GE. Instead ESP, personalization, performance-based, 1-1 = dogme, tyranny of the coursebook\n\nSo I developed a open online platform to do all this. This puts me in a quandry, because I’m in the wonderful position where, whatever I believe pedagogically, I can implement in the English360 platform. So there is a one to one correspondence between what I believe as a teacher and the platform. The downside to this is that I can’t talk about my ideas in ELT without it sounding like a sales pitch. So with that pre-emptive caveat let’s get the issues at play here.\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • About me and English360, teacher, school owner, e360, e360>consultant, e360>e360.\n\nBE, not classroom-based GE. Instead ESP, personalization, performance-based, 1-1 = dogme, tyranny of the coursebook\n\nSo I developed a open online platform to do all this. This puts me in a quandry, because I’m in the wonderful position where, whatever I believe pedagogically, I can implement in the English360 platform. So there is a one to one correspondence between what I believe as a teacher and the platform. The downside to this is that I can’t talk about my ideas in ELT without it sounding like a sales pitch. So with that pre-emptive caveat let’s get the issues at play here.\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n

Transcript

  • 1. Six Principles for Success with Blended LearningIATEFL Chile Conference 2012Cleve Miller - English360
  • 2. AgendaOne contextTwo problemsFive principles
  • 3. AgendaOne context for technology and ELTTwo problemsFive principles
  • 4. AgendaOne context for technology and ELTTwo problems that are slowing progressFive principles
  • 5. AgendaOne context for technology and ELTTwo problems that are slowing progressFive principles that can help guide the way
  • 6. cleve@english360.comwww.english360.com/blogtwitter: cleve360
  • 7. AgendaOne context for technology and ELTTwo problems that are slowing progressFive principles that can help guide the way
  • 8. Content from the cloud...
  • 9. ...delivered through a range of mobile devices,
  • 10. ...ubiquitous,
  • 11. personalised for each learner...
  • 12. ...adaptive,
  • 13. ...and social.
  • 14. So, personalized, adaptive, and social, withubiquitous cloud-to-mobile delivery.How are these trends being implementedin blended learning programs?
  • 15. Time Place
  • 16. Time together apart Place
  • 17. asynchronousTime synchronous together apart Place
  • 18. asynchronousTime (classroom) synchronous together apart Place
  • 19. asynchronousTime (classroom) synchronous IWB projector Ss mobile together apart Place
  • 20. asynchronousTime (classroom) (computer) synchronous IWB projector Ss mobile together apart Place
  • 21. asynchronousTime (classroom) (computer) synchronous IWB phone / skype projector chat Ss mobile web conference together apart Place
  • 22. (computer) asynchronousTime (classroom) (computer) synchronous IWB phone / skype projector chat Ss mobile web conference together apart Place
  • 23. (computer) asynchronous forums wikis tasks, drillsTime (classroom) (computer) synchronous IWB phone / skype projector chat Ss mobile web conference together apart Place
  • 24. (computer) asynchronous language lab forums wikis tasks, drillsTime (classroom) (computer) synchronous IWB phone / skype projector chat Ss mobile web conference together apart Place
  • 25. “blended learning” (computer) asynchronous language lab forums wikis tasks, drillsTime (classroom) (computer) synchronous IWB phone / skype projector chat Ss mobile web conference together apart Place
  • 26. What is blended learning?“Blended, blended, the future is blended.”
  • 27. What is blended learning?“Blended, blended, the future is blended.” Combination of: in-class (F2F, synchronous) + out-of-class (online, asynchronous)
  • 28. What is blended learning?“Blended, blended, the future is blended.” Combination of: in-class (F2F, synchronous) + out-of-class (online, asynchronous) typically organized in a Learning Management System (LMS) or Virtual Learning Environment (VLE)
  • 29. Benefits of technology
  • 30. Benefits of technology Flexibility for ID, efficiency for teaching
  • 31. Benefits of technology Flexibility for ID, efficiency for teaching Collapse of time and space
  • 32. Benefits of technology Flexibility for ID, efficiency for teaching Collapse of time and space Hyper-personalisation
  • 33. Benefits of technology Flexibility for ID, efficiency for teaching Collapse of time and space Hyper-personalisation “big data”
  • 34. Benefits of technology Flexibility for ID, efficiency for teaching Collapse of time and space Hyper-personalisation “big data” Student focus / UGC
  • 35. A 2-minute history of the web(and how it effects us as teachers)
  • 36. The old web is aThe old web is a pipe. pipe.
  • 37. What is the “old web” relationship?Top-down, expert-created, static, passively consumed
  • 38. The new web is a platform....where we all work together to create, share, discuss, learn.
  • 39. What direction is the relationship?Bottom-up, active user-generated, dynamic content
  • 40. What direction is the relationship?Bottom-up, active user-generated, dynamic content
  • 41. What direction is the relationship?Bottom-up, active user-generated, dynamic content
  • 42. What direction is the relationship?Bottom-up, active user-generated, dynamic content
  • 43. What direction is the relationship?Bottom-up, active user-generated, dynamic content
  • 44. What direction is the relationship?Bottom-up, active user-generated, dynamic content
  • 45. Active users: new skills for teachersWeb apps today support creativity: “teacher as DJ” Source: Jamie Keddie 11/6/09
  • 46. Educational materials developmentThe content continuum and a new way forward SCHOOL PUBLISHER TEACHER STUDENT
  • 47. Educational materials developmentThe content continuum and a new way forward Traditional Technology-supportedTOP DOWN BOTTOM UP model model SCHOOL PUBLISHER TEACHER STUDENT
  • 48. Educational materials developmentThe content continuum and a new way forward Traditional Technology-supportedTOP DOWN BOTTOM UP model model SCHOOL PUBLISHER TEACHER STUDENTreliable, validated pedagogic qualityeasy to use, saves timequality production
  • 49. Educational materials developmentThe content continuum and a new way forward Traditional Technology-supportedTOP DOWN BOTTOM UP model model SCHOOL PUBLISHER TEACHER STUDENTreliable, validated pedagogic quality fast, up-to-date, and inexpensiveeasy to use, saves time closer fit to language, culture, student needsquality production integration with content areas
  • 50. Educational materials developmentThe content continuum and a new way forward Traditional Technology-supportedTOP DOWN BOTTOM UP model model SCHOOL PUBLISHER TEACHER STUDENTreliable, validated pedagogic quality fast, up-to-date, and inexpensiveeasy to use, saves time closer fit to language, culture, student needsquality production integration with content areas Open platforms allow teachers to move along this continuum to fit learner needs (i.e. specificity).
  • 51. Principle 1: how tech improves teaching
  • 52. Principle 1: how tech improves teachingWhen possible, always leverage technology to enable “web 2.0”,bottom-up, student-centered, user-generated content / output.
  • 53. Principle 1: how tech improves teachingWhen possible, always leverage technology to enable “web 2.0”,bottom-up, student-centered, user-generated content / output.
  • 54. Principle 1: how tech improves teachingWhen possible, always leverage technology to enable “web 2.0”,bottom-up, student-centered, user-generated content / output. “It’s not about the technology, it’s about the learner” - Valentina Dodge
  • 55. AgendaOne context for technology and ESPTwo problems that are slowing progressThree principles that can help guide the way
  • 56. Teacher resistance and frustrationwith web technologies in ELTphoto by Marcelo Duarte, CC Flickr
  • 57. Teacher resistance and frustrationwith web technologies in ELTReason #1Reason #2photo by Marcelo Duarte, CC Flickr
  • 58. Teacher resistance and frustrationwith web technologies in ELTReason #1Humans resist changeReason #2photo by Marcelo Duarte, CC Flickr
  • 59. Teacher resistance and frustrationwith web technologies in ELT Everett Rogers, from his book Diffusion of Innovation
  • 60. Teacher resistance and frustrationwith web technologies in ELTReason #1Humans resist changeReason #2
  • 61. Teacher resistance and frustrationwith web technologies in ELTReason #1Humans resist changeReason #2It’s new. We are not sure what weare doing yet.
  • 62. Teacher resistance and frustrationwith web technologies in ELTReason #1Humans resist changeReason #2It’s new. We are not sure what weare doing yet.Little dissemination of best practices: toomuch “what” and not enough “how”....
  • 63. Three stages ofweb adoption in ELT
  • 64. Three stages ofweb adoption in ELT1. Tools
  • 65. Three stages ofweb adoption in ELT1. Tools2. Techniques
  • 66. Three stages ofweb adoption in ELT1. Tools2. Techniques3. Traction
  • 67. Three stages ofweb adoption in ELT1. Tools2. Techniques3. Traction
  • 68. AgendaOne context for technology and ESPTwo problems that are slowing progressFive principles that can help guide the way
  • 69. Implementing blended learning design:Three levels of analysis
  • 70. Implementing blended learning design:Three levels of analysis 1. Task level
  • 71. Implementing blended learning design:Three levels of analysis 1. Task level 2. Course level
  • 72. Implementing blended learning design:Three levels of analysis 1. Task level 2. Course level 3. Strategic level
  • 73. Implementing blended learning design:Three levels of analysis 1. Task level 2. Course level 3. Strategic level
  • 74. Blended task design: definition of “task”“...a broader and higher order process than “step, “activity”or “technology” used in the lesson. Thus it may take a mix ofseveral steps online and F2F to achieve a task.” Gruba, Hinkelman 2012
  • 75. “Blended task” design: definition“...a broader and higher order process than “step, “activity”or “technology” used in the lesson. Thus it may take a mix ofseveral steps online and F2F to achieve a task.” Gruba, Hinkelman 2012 “...includes subtasks that move back and forth between online and face-to-face venues.” Hinkelman 2005
  • 76. “blended learning” (computer) asynchronous language lab (?) forums wikis input, drillsTime (computer) synchronous (classroom) phone / skype chat web conference together apart Place
  • 77. Principle 2: blended task design
  • 78. Principle 2: blended task designWhen designing tasks, separate elements of the task into whatis best done F2F and what is best done online.
  • 79. Principle 2: blended task designWhen designing tasks, separate elements of the task into whatis best done F2F and what is best done online. F2F Speaking, interaction, dialogue, role play, and focus on meaning
  • 80. Principle 2: blended task designWhen designing tasks, separate elements of the task into whatis best done F2F and what is best done online. F2F Speaking, interaction, dialogue, role play, and focus on meaning Online receptive skills, remedial work, drills, writing, reflection, focus on form
  • 81. Principle 2: blended task designWhen designing tasks, separate elements of the task into whatis best done F2F and what is best done online. F2F Speaking, interaction, dialogue, role play, and focus on meaning Online receptive skills, remedial work, drills, writing, reflection, focus on form •Blended learning supports a dogme classroom
  • 82. Principle 2: blended task designWhen designing tasks, separate elements of the task into whatis best done F2F and what is best done online. F2F Speaking, interaction, dialogue, role play, and focus on meaning Online receptive skills, remedial work, drills, writing, reflection, focus on form •Blended learning supports a dogme classroom •It’s not about the technology, it’s about the learner
  • 83. Principle 2: blended task designWhen designing tasks, separate elements of the task into whatis best done F2F and what is best done online. F2F Speaking, interaction, dialogue, role play, and focus on meaning Online receptive skills, remedial work, drills, writing, reflection, focus on form •Blended learning supports a dogme classroom •It’s not about the technology, it’s about the learner •Tech-enabled flipped classrooms humanise
  • 84. Implementing blended learning design:Three levels of analysis 1. Task level 2. Course level 3. Strategic level
  • 85. Implementing blended learning design:Three levels of analysis 1. Task level 2. Course level 3. Strategic level
  • 86. Principle 3: blended course design
  • 87. Principle 3: blended course designWhen designing courses, integrate the F2F and online elementstogether so that they are co-dependent, with either a fixed oremergent syllabus.
  • 88. Principle 3: blended course designWhen designing courses, integrate the F2F and online elementstogether so that they are co-dependent, with either a fixed oremergent syllabus. Dual track Integrated
  • 89. Principle 3: blended course designWhen designing courses, integrate the F2F and online elementstogether so that they are co-dependent, with either a fixed oremergent syllabus. Dual track Integrated F2F online
  • 90. Principle 3: blended course designWhen designing courses, integrate the F2F and online elementstogether so that they are co-dependent, with either a fixed oremergent syllabus. Dual track Integrated F2F online F2F online
  • 91. Principle 3: blended course designWhen designing courses, integrate the F2F and online elementstogether so that they are co-dependent, with either a fixed oremergent syllabus. Dual track Integrated F2F online F2F online
  • 92. Principle 3: blended course designWhen designing courses, integrate the F2F and online elementstogether so that they are co-dependent, with either a fixed oremergent syllabus.Dual track IntegratedF2F online F2F online
  • 93. Principle 3: blended course designWhen designing courses, integrate the F2F and online elementstogether so that they are co-dependent, with either a fixed oremergent syllabus.Dual track Integrated IntegratedF2F online F2F online F2F online
  • 94. Case study #1
  • 95. Case study on course design: LTC
  • 96. Case study on course design: LTCUses range of dual track and integrated
  • 97. Course design: dual track and integrated
  • 98. Course design: dual track and integrated• Defines course design based on client, teachers
  • 99. Course design: dual track and integrated• Defines course design based on client, teachers• Dual track uses print coursebook (Business Benchmark) for F2F, with online components
  • 100. Course design: dual track and integrated• Defines course design based on client, teachers• Dual track uses print coursebook (Business Benchmark) for F2F, with online components• Digital component is Business Benchmark workbook, some coursebook content, plus 25% customized content
  • 101. Course design: dual track and integrated• Defines course design based on client, teachers• Dual track uses print coursebook (Business Benchmark) for F2F, with online components• Digital component is Business Benchmark workbook, some coursebook content, plus 25% customized content• Integrated courses fully personalised, customised for each client, group
  • 102. Course design: dual track and integrated• Defines course design based on client, teachers• Dual track uses print coursebook (Business Benchmark) for F2F, with online components• Digital component is Business Benchmark workbook, some coursebook content, plus 25% customized content• Integrated courses fully personalised, customised for each client, group• Integrated courses pre-loaded with content anticipated through NA, but only “published” when need emerges
  • 103. Course design: dual track and integrated• Defines course design based on client, teachers• Dual track uses print coursebook (Business Benchmark) for F2F, with online components• Digital component is Business Benchmark workbook, some coursebook content, plus 25% customized content• Integrated courses fully personalised, customised for each client, group• Integrated courses pre-loaded with content anticipated through NA, but only “published” when need emerges• Benefit to corp HR: emergent performance-based syllabus focusing on bottom-line business needs
  • 104. Implementing blended learning design:Three levels of analysis 1. Task level 2. Course level 3. Strategic level
  • 105. Principle 4: blended strategy design
  • 106. Principle 4: blended strategy designImplementing blended learning requires pro-active andsustained communication to all stakeholders regardingspecific benefits and expectations for each.
  • 107. Principle 4: blended strategy designImplementing blended learning requires pro-active andsustained communication to all stakeholders regardingspecific benefits and expectations for each. Stakeholder Benefit
  • 108. Principle 4: blended strategy designImplementing blended learning requires pro-active andsustained communication to all stakeholders regardingspecific benefits and expectations for each. Stakeholder Benefit Universities, HR
  • 109. Principle 4: blended strategy designImplementing blended learning requires pro-active andsustained communication to all stakeholders regardingspecific benefits and expectations for each. Stakeholder Benefit Universities, HR Students
  • 110. Principle 4: blended strategy designImplementing blended learning requires pro-active andsustained communication to all stakeholders regardingspecific benefits and expectations for each. Stakeholder Benefit Universities, HR Students Teachers
  • 111. Principle 4: blended strategy designImplementing blended learning requires pro-active andsustained communication to all stakeholders regardingspecific benefits and expectations for each. Stakeholder Benefit Universities, HR Do more with less Students Teachers
  • 112. Principle 4: blended strategy designImplementing blended learning requires pro-active andsustained communication to all stakeholders regardingspecific benefits and expectations for each. Stakeholder Benefit Universities, HR Do more with less Students Flexibility Teachers
  • 113. Principle 4: blended strategy designImplementing blended learning requires pro-active andsustained communication to all stakeholders regardingspecific benefits and expectations for each. Stakeholder Benefit Universities, HR Do more with less Students Flexibility Teachers Better teaching, pro dev, higher pay
  • 114. Case study #2
  • 115. Case study on strategy: Vantage
  • 116. Case study on strategy: VantageBusiness model, stakeholder benefits
  • 117. Business model, stakeholder benefits
  • 118. Business model, stakeholder benefits• 1500 students in blended learning program
  • 119. Business model, stakeholder benefits• 1500 students in blended learning program• Programs based on course duration, not class hours
  • 120. Business model, stakeholder benefits• 1500 students in blended learning program• Programs based on course duration, not class hours• Courses are priced just below market average
  • 121. Business model, stakeholder benefits• 1500 students in blended learning program• Programs based on course duration, not class hours• Courses are priced just below market average• 50% F2F, 50% online: teaching costs drop, margin up
  • 122. Business model, stakeholder benefits• 1500 students in blended learning program• Programs based on course duration, not class hours• Courses are priced just below market average• 50% F2F, 50% online: teaching costs drop, margin up• Use higher margin to raise teacher pay, Ss support
  • 123. Business model, stakeholder benefits• 1500 students in blended learning program• Programs based on course duration, not class hours• Courses are priced just below market average• 50% F2F, 50% online: teaching costs drop, margin up• Use higher margin to raise teacher pay, Ss support• Benefit to universities, corp HR: better teaching, flexibility, doing more with less infrastructure
  • 124. Principle 4: blended strategy design
  • 125. Principle 4: blended strategy designImplementing blended learning requires pro-active andsustained communication to all stakeholders regardingspecific benefits and expectations for each.
  • 126. Principle 4: blended strategy designImplementing blended learning requires pro-active andsustained communication to all stakeholders regardingspecific benefits and expectations for each. Principle 4 corollary: The most important stakeholders are the teachers.
  • 127. Case study #3
  • 128. Case study on onboarding: LTC
  • 129. Case study on strategy design: LTCTeacher-driven onboarding is required
  • 130. Case study on onboarding: LTC
  • 131. Case study on onboarding: LTC• Defines course design based on client, teachers
  • 132. Case study on onboarding: LTC• Defines course design based on client, teachers• HR department defines realistic online time expectations: ranges from 30 minutes to 90 minutes per week.
  • 133. Case study on onboarding: LTC• Defines course design based on client, teachers• HR department defines realistic online time expectations: ranges from 30 minutes to 90 minutes per week.• Online component not introduced until second class
  • 134. Case study on onboarding: LTC• Defines course design based on client, teachers• HR department defines realistic online time expectations: ranges from 30 minutes to 90 minutes per week.• Online component not introduced until second class• In second class, teachers introduce platform, online component projected in class on IWB or screen
  • 135. Case study on onboarding: LTC• Defines course design based on client, teachers• HR department defines realistic online time expectations: ranges from 30 minutes to 90 minutes per week.• Online component not introduced until second class• In second class, teachers introduce platform, online component projected in class on IWB or screen• Course invitations to LMS sent from F2F class itself
  • 136. Case study on onboarding: LTC• Defines course design based on client, teachers• HR department defines realistic online time expectations: ranges from 30 minutes to 90 minutes per week.• Online component not introduced until second class• In second class, teachers introduce platform, online component projected in class on IWB or screen• Course invitations to LMS sent from F2F class itself• Course structure, benefits, expectations discussed
  • 137. Case study on onboarding: LTC• Defines course design based on client, teachers• HR department defines realistic online time expectations: ranges from 30 minutes to 90 minutes per week.• Online component not introduced until second class• In second class, teachers introduce platform, online component projected in class on IWB or screen• Course invitations to LMS sent from F2F class itself• Course structure, benefits, expectations discussed• Teachers lead process as “ambassadors”
  • 138. Summary
  • 139. By letting humans do what humans do best,and machines do what machines do best,blended learning provides a humanistic,student-driven, personalised learning.
  • 140. When possible, always leverage technologyto enable “web 2.0”, bottom-up, student-centred, user-generated content and output.
  • 141. Optimal blended course design fullyintegrates classroom and online tasks
  • 142. Successful implementation of blendedprograms requires communication ofstakeholder benefits
  • 143. Principle 4 corollary: teachers first
  • 144. Principle 4 corollary: teachers firstWeb 2 approach: bottom up, active users
  • 145. Principle 4 corollary: teachers firstWeb 2 approach: bottom up, active usersPrinciple 5:Teachers can engage with technologythemselves, not waiting for institutionaldirection. Action research approach.
  • 146. Thank you.
  • 147. Approaches to BE, ESP course designCurricular, needs-based, performance-based Course design Selection of outcomes Material and process Source: Cleve Miller in 2/2010 Business Issues (BESIG)
  • 148. Approaches to BE, ESP course designCurricular, needs-based, performance-based Course design Selection of outcomes Material and processCurriculum-basedNeeds-basedPerformance-based Source: Cleve Miller in 2/2010 Business Issues (BESIG)
  • 149. Approaches to BE, ESP course designCurricular, needs-based, performance-based Course design Selection of outcomes Material and process predicts genericCurriculum-based performance goalsNeeds-basedPerformance-based Source: Cleve Miller in 2/2010 Business Issues (BESIG)
  • 150. Approaches to BE, ESP course designCurricular, needs-based, performance-based Course design Selection of outcomes Material and process predicts genericCurriculum-based Work through a coursebook performance goalsNeeds-basedPerformance-based Source: Cleve Miller in 2/2010 Business Issues (BESIG)
  • 151. Approaches to BE, ESP course designCurricular, needs-based, performance-based Course design Selection of outcomes Material and process predicts genericCurriculum-based Work through a coursebook performance goals identifies categoriesNeeds-based of performance goalsPerformance-based Source: Cleve Miller in 2/2010 Business Issues (BESIG)
  • 152. Approaches to BE, ESP course designCurricular, needs-based, performance-based Course design Selection of outcomes Material and process predicts genericCurriculum-based Work through a coursebook performance goals identifies categories Select from range of resources,Needs-based of performance goals based on needs analysisPerformance-based Source: Cleve Miller in 2/2010 Business Issues (BESIG)
  • 153. Approaches to BE, ESP course designCurricular, needs-based, performance-based Course design Selection of outcomes Material and process predicts genericCurriculum-based Work through a coursebook performance goals identifies categories Select from range of resources,Needs-based of performance goals based on needs analysis responds to specificPerformance-based performance events Source: Cleve Miller in 2/2010 Business Issues (BESIG)
  • 154. Approaches to BE, ESP course designCurricular, needs-based, performance-based Course design Selection of outcomes Material and process predicts genericCurriculum-based Work through a coursebook performance goals identifies categories Select from range of resources,Needs-based of performance goals based on needs analysis responds to specific Language needs for the eventPerformance-based performance events define materials, methods Source: Cleve Miller in 2/2010 Business Issues (BESIG)