Your SlideShare is downloading. ×

Blended intro

936

Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
936
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
21
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

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
  • Courses with a carefully planned blend of traditional classroom instruction and online learning
  • Traditional classrooms struggle often with Limited opportunities for students to use the target language Limited access to authentic materials Limited input from a variety of sources Integration of language, literature, and culture
  • More language focus in upper-level class Self-evaluations gave students an active role in shaping the course Integration of online components in face-to-face instruction
  • More language focus in upper-level class Self-evaluations gave students an active role in shaping the course Integration of online components in face-to-face instruction
  • Transcript

    • 1. Introduction to Blended/Online Learning Angelika Kraemer & Scott Schopieray CLEAR Summer 2010 Workshop
    • 2. Overview
      • Definitions
      • Rationale for blended instruction
      • Advantages, disadvantages, and challenges of blended instruction
      • Best practices
    • 3. Definitions: Blended/Hybrid Education
      • Combining the best of F2F and online learning
      Sloan-C, 2005
    • 4. Definitions: Common Terms
      • CALL: Computer-Assisted Language Learning
      • CMC: Computer-Mediated Communication
      • CMS: Course Management System
      • Web 2.0
    • 5. CALL
      • Authenticity
      • Extension of class time
      • Immediate feedback
      • Interactive
      • Student-centered
      • Democratization of participation
      • Decreasing grading load
      • Increasing communication
      • Using Generation Web 2.0’s language
      • Computer access
      • Computer literacy
      • Outdated quickly
      • Equipment failure
      Benefits and Challenges CALICO
    • 6. CMC
      • Communicating via the computer
      • Synchronous:
        • Video/voice/text chat
        • Messaging
        • Virtual reality ( Second Life )
      • Asynchronous:
        • Email/voice mail
        • Blogs
        • Discussion forums/message boards
        • Walls ( MySpace , Facebook )
        • Wikis
      • Research Report:
        • Improvement in language development
        • Learner-centered
        • More on task
        • More target language use
        • More equal participation
    • 7. Benefits of CMC
      • CMC provides
      • opportunities for target language use
      • a voice to those who do not have one (shyer students)
      • a great range of language functions through discourse
      • CMC increases
      • language productivity and output
      • interactive discourse
      • willingness to discuss topics openly and honestly
      • student motivation
      • CMC improves
      • reading comprehension and writing ability
      • attitude toward language learning in general and cultures
      • language development
      • CMC decreases
      • teacher dominance
      • anxiety
      • CMC does not hinder oral proficiency development
    • 8. CMS
      • Course web sites to manage instruction
      • Examples
        • MSU: Angel
        • Other commercial CMS: WebCT, Blackboard
        • Free: Nicenet , Wikispaces
      • Common features
        • CMC (chat, discussion board, email)
        • Class roster
        • Grade book
        • Calendar
        • Announcements
        • Attendance keeper/Activity log
        • Lesson folders
        • Online assignments/Tests
        • Virtual office hours
    • 9. Web 2.0
      • Web 2.0:
      • Term coined by O’Reilly in 2004
      • Signifies web applications that increase user participation, collaboration, interaction
      • Entails social networking technologies such as blogs, wikis, and YouTube
      • Web 1.0:
      • Applications such as Email, discussion forums, chat rooms, and instant messaging
      • The main difference between Web 1.0 and 2.0 lies in the extent of collaboration
      • Web 3.0 :
      • Immersive environments and virtual realities such as Second Life
    • 10. Rationale for Blended Instruction
      • Issues in the language classroom
        • Articulation
        • Student perceptions
        • Development of language skills
        • Classroom practices
      • Increase in FL enrollment (Furman, Goldberg, & Lusin, 2007)
      • Increase in blended liberal arts courses (SLOAN-C, 2007)
      • Offer flexibility to students and teachers
      • Might work better for some
      • Desired language/form focus missing in upper division content courses (Polio & Zyzik, 2008)
      • Concurrent acquisition of technology skills
    • 11. Your Experience
      • How have you used technology for your teaching?
        • What has worked for you?
        • What has not worked for you?
    • 12. Advantages of Blended Instruction
      • Flexibility in time & space (Chenoweth, 2006; Goertler & Winke, 2008)
      • Cost saving – depending on structure (Sanders, 2005; Scida & Saury, 2006)
      • Access to non-traditional students (Chenoweth, 2006; Scida & Saury, 2006; Strambi & Bouvet, 2003)
      • Enrollment increase (Sanders, 2005; Scida & Saury, 2006)
      • Decreasing class size (Sanders, 2005)
      • Increasing course offerings: more sections & LCTLs across institutions
      • Similar language learning outcomes (Chenoweth et al, 2006; Sanders, 2005)
      • More time spend with materials (Sanders, 2005)
      • Positive reviews from students (Kraemer, 2008; Strambi & Bouvet, 2003)
    • 13. Disadvantages of Blended Instruction
      • Oral and written proficiency may suffer (Sanders, 2005)
      • Lower motivation (Chenoweth et al., 2006)
      • Online format not successful with less computer literate students (Scida & Saury, 2006)
    • 14. Challenges in Blended Instruction
      • Technology failure (Chenoweth et al., 2006)
      • Buy-in from
        • Students (Goertler et al., under review; Winke & Goertler, 2008)
        • Teachers (Arnold, 2007; Goertler & Uzum, under review; Goertler & Winke, 2008)
      • Myths about technology use (Blake, 2001)
      • Lack of normalization (Chambers & Bax, 2006)
      • Teacher preparation (Kessler, 2006, 2007)
      • Student computer literacy and access (Barrette, 2001; Winke & Goertler, 2008)
      • Time commitment: Up to 500% increase (Web-based Education Commission, 2000)
      • Lack of rewards
      • High start-up and development costs
    • 15. Best Practices
      • Blended format is effective
      • Student-centered format supports the integration of academic content and linguistic skills online and in class
      • Students spend more time on task
      • Collaborative and authentic
      • Positive influence on student engagement, collaboration, responsibility, and classroom atmosphere
      • Increases in fluency, confidence, and motivation
    • 16. Best Practices
      • Instructor involvement
      • Integration of online components in face-to-face instruction
        • Online assignments should enhance learning experience and not be busy work
      • Transparency of functionality, purpose, grading criteria, and due dates
        • Continuous training and feedback
      • Implementation of different assignment types to address students’ differing needs

    ×