The document discusses practical applications of online and face-to-face activities for language learning. It begins by introducing blended, hybrid, distance, online, and correspondence learning models. It then examines how to effectively develop online courses using theories such as Vygotsky's zone of proximal development and Gagne's nine instructional events. Examples are provided of activities that have been adapted from face-to-face to online settings. The document concludes by listing resources for online language instruction.

1. Online or Face-to-Face?
PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS OF ONLINE AND FACE-TO-FACE ACTIVITIES TO
STIMULATE LANGUAGE MASTERY

2. Getting to know each other…
• MFS French & Int’l. Education, UW-Madison
• Ph.D. student in Instructional Psych & Tech, SLA, BYU
• Virtual school program coordinator and admin
• BYU academic consultant for blended/online
• 10 years French online & F2F
• Developed 46 online & blended world language courses
• Involved in global literacy initiative
• Mentor for ACTFL Distance Learning SIG

3. Today’s objectives
 Students will distinguish between blended/hybrid, distance, and
online learning.
 Students will consider pedagogical adaptations that may improve
success in blended, distance, and online learning environments.
 Students will explore tools for facilitating online learning.

4. Online learning stats
 1997–98 : 1.08 million students taking
undergraduate, online courses (Lewis,
Snow, Farris, Levin & Greene, 1999)
 2006–07 : 9.8 million undergraduate,
online enrollments (Parsad & Lewis, 2008)
 2012 : 26.4% of all college students
were enrolled in at least one online
class or distance education program
(U.S. Department of Education, National
Center for Education Statistics, Integrated
Postsecondary Education Data System,
2014).
 2013 up 3.7%; 2014 up 3.9%
(Damron, J. & Quinlan, J., 2017)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
1997-1998 2006-2007 2012
University Online Course
Enrollment Trends
Year

5. What’s what?
 Blended/hybrid
 Online
 Distance
 Correspondence
Photo credit: Is.byu.edu © 2016

6. F2F, blended, or online?
Traditional
(face-to-face)
Web-Facilitated Blended/Hybrid Online (distance)
Online percentage 0% 1–29% 30–79% 80+%
Characteristics No significant
online use
Content is
written or oral
Uses technology
for web pages,
syllabus,
assignments, etc.
Online + face-to-
face delivery
Online discussion
Reduced number
of classroom
meetings
Most to all
content delivered
online
No in-person
meetings
(Allen and Seaman, http://www.onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports/changingcourse.pdf. 2013)

7. Higher Ed Act: Correspondence
 Correspondence course: (1) A course provided by an
institution under which the institution provides
instructional materials, by mail or electronic
transmission, including examinations on the materials, to
students who are separated from the instructor.
Interaction between the instructor and student is limited,
is not regular and substantive, and is primarily initiated by
the student. Correspondence courses are typically self-
paced.
https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-
idx?SID=7d18fcad01f49a0e6de81b8100a1eeaf&mc=true&node=pt34.3.600&rgn=div5#se34.3.600_12; accessed March 28, 2017.

8. Distance Education
 Distance education means education that uses one or more of the technologies listed in
paragraphs (1) through (4) of this definition to deliver instruction to students who are
separated from the instructor and to support regular and substantive interaction
between the students and the instructor, either synchronously or asynchronously. The
technologies may include—
 (1) The internet;
 (2) One-way and two-way transmissions through open broadcast, closed circuit, cable,
microwave, broadband lines, fiber optics, satellite, or wireless communications devices;
 (3) Audio conferencing; or
 (4) Video cassettes, DVDs, and CD-ROMs, if the cassettes, DVDs, or CD-ROMs are used in a
course in conjunction with any of the technologies listed in paragraphs (1) through (3) of
this definition.

9. Approaches to Online Development
“A start” (weaker sense)
 Add on to deficient approaches
 Insert technology-based interactions/assignments without follow-up
“Good progress” (stronger sense)
 Transformative process: improves the educational experience
 Capitalize on technology for engagement
(Norm Vaughan, Mount Royal University, 2013. National Survey of Student Engagement, 2011.)
Design

10. “Blended” Considerations
Synchronous
 spontaneous
 ephemeral
 peer influence
 passion
 preferred
Asynchronous
 reflective
 permanent
 < intimidating
 reason
 > rigor
integrate
complement
Develop

11. What to put online
 Technology vs. human strengths (Charles
Graham)
 Efficacy vs. efficiency
 Good pedagogy!
 Let the experts do what they do best
Don’t mistake technology implementation or
“throwing it online” with effective online
development & application
http://www.sil.si.edu/ImageGalaxy/ImageGalax
y_imageDetail.cfm?id_image=126

12. What works best?
 Cohort-based with hard deadlines vs. self-paced
 Creating a community of learners (Lave & Wenger); interaction matters
 Tools that are ADA compliant/accessible & low-cost or free
 Language considerations:
 Recordings, peer & self-evaluation: meta-cognition
 Journal/blog/discussion forums/virtual labs
Low-stakes environments for students to experiment
w/language
 Appropriate assessment (pre- & post-test to measure growth)

13. LET’S TRY IT!

14. Online vs F2F… what does it look like?
 Log in: Byuconed.adobeconnect.com/quinlan
 Enter as a guest, using your name
 Run the audio wizard
 Mute your microphone and speakers
 Type something in the chat once you’re logged in

15. Who are you?
 Classroom experience
 Physical
 Noisy/takes time
 Familiar
 Online experience
 Visual
 Confusing
 Efficient

16. I can…
By the end of this session, you will be able to:
 Understand Gagne’s 9 instructional events
 Correlate the 9 events to language instruction
 Identify ways to adapt classroom and online activities to either setting
 Engage students in creative speaking using visual cognition

17. Guiding Theories
Vygotsky’s ZPD
 What can students do without help
 What can students do with help
 Guiding them to be able to
increase in tacit skills
 Modeling
 Scaffolding
 Transfer/generalizability
Gagne’s 9 Instructional Events
 Gain attention
 Stimulate recall of prior learning
 Present stimulus
 Provide learning guidance
 Elicit performance
 Provide feedback
 Assess performance
 Enhance retention & transfer

18. What’s happening here?
Ce n’est pas normal, ça?

19. What would it look like online?
 Objectives are the same
 Activity is the same
 How do students work collaboratively?
 How is feedback shared?
 Is it less/more authentic?
 How does instructor provide the enhanced transfer and retention?
 Considerations: online forums, vlogs/blogs, discussion threads, live webinars

20. Purposes of Activities
 Activity 1: raise your hand if, move here if
 achieves gain attention, recall of prior learning
 Activity 2: what’s happening here?
 achieves present stimulus, provide learning guidance, elicit performance, provide
feedback, retention/transfer
 achieves using tacit knowledge/context clues to go into zpd and draw conclusions,
create meaning, apply oral skills
 What of the 5 C’s have we achieved today?
 What communicative modes have we used?
 Do you think you’ll remember something from what you did today?

21. I can…
Two activities. Online and F2F examples. Can you now:
 Understand Gagne’s 9 instructional events
 Correlate the 9 events to language instruction
 Identify ways to adapt classroom and online activities to either setting
 Engage students in creative speaking using visual cognition
QUESTIONS & COMMENTS?

22. Resources for online language instruction
Professional organizations
 iCALL (International Computer Assisted Language Learning)
 CALICO (Computer Assisted Language Instruction Consortium)
 MLA (Modern Language Association)
 ACTFL Special Interest Groups (e.g., Distance Learning SIG)
 Journals & other publications from any of these organizations
Instructional Resources
 BYU Independent Study (byu.is/languages); Carnegie Mellon Open Learning Initiative (oli.cmu.edu)
 Recent publication on assessment in F2F, blended, and online versions of the same course (email me if you want a
copy)
 Mango, Duo Lingo, Rosetta Stone, SANS Space, Pearson MyLabs, Vista Higher Learning, Pronunciator
 BYU Digital Humanities Lab: Ayamel and other streaming; expansive international media library

23.  Allen, Elaine I & Seaman, Jeff. (2013). Changing Course: Ten Years of Tracking Online
Education in the United States.
http://www.onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports/changingcourse.pdf
 Bates, J.E., Almekdash, H., & Gilchrest-Dunnam, M.J. (2016). The Flipped Classroom: A
Brief, Brief History. The Flipped College Classroom, 3-10. Doi: 10.1008/978-3-319-
41855-1_1
 Bruner, J.S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University
Press.
 Clayton Christensen Institute. (2015). http://www.christenseninstitute.org/blended-
learning-definitions-and-models/.” Christenseninstitute.org.
 Cho, Young Mee. (2010). Integrated Korean: Beginning 1. Honolulu; University of Hawaii
Press.
 Gagné, R. M., and Brigs, L. J. (1979). Principles of instructional design, 2nd ed. New York:
Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
 Gagné, R. M., and Dick, W. (1983). Instructional psychology. Annual Review of
Psychology, 34, 261-295.
 Hart, C. M. D., Friedmann, E. A. Z., & Hill, M. (2016). Online Course-Taking and Student
Outcomes in California Community Colleges. Education Finance and Policy.
 Johnson, H., & Cuellar Mejia, M. (2014). Online Learning and Student Outcomes in
California’s Community Colleges. San Francisco, CA: Public Policy Institute of California.
 Kaupp, R. (2012). Online Penalty: The Impact of Online Instruction on the Latino-White
Achievement Gap. Journal of Applied Research in the Community College, 19(2), 8–16.
 Lewis, L., Snow, K., Farris, E., Levin, D., & Greene, B. (1999). Distance Education at
Postsecondary Education Institutions: 1997–98. Washington, DC: National Center for
Education Statistics, US Department of Education.
 National Center for Educational Statistics. (2014). Digest of Education Statistics.
Retrieved from nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d14/tables/dt14_311.15.asp.
 Parsad, B., & Lewis, L. (2008). Distance Education at Degree-Granting Postsecondary
Institutions: 2006–07. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute
of Education Sciences.
 Sykes, J. M., & Cohen, A. D. (2008). Observed Learner Behavior, Reported Use, and
Evaluation of a Website for Learning Spanish Pragmatics. Selected Proceedings of the
2007 Second Language Research Forum, 144–157.
 US Department of Education, Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning:
A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies. (2010).
 Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). L. S. Vygotsky: Mind in Society. The Development of Higher
Psychological Processes (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Eds.).
The American Journal of Psychology, 92(1). doi:10.2307/1421493
 Warschauer, M., & Kern, R. (2000). Network-based Language Teaching: Concepts and
Practice, 12–14. Cambridge University Press.
 Xu, D., & Jaggars, S. (2011). The Effectiveness of Distance Education across Virginia’s
Community Colleges: Evidence from Introductory College-Level Math and English
Courses. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 33(3), 360–377.
 Xu, D., & Jaggars, S. (2013). The Impact of Online Learning on Students’ Course
Outcomes: Evidence from a Large Community and Technical College System.
Economics of Education Review, 3, 46–57.
 Xu, D., & Jaggars, S. S. (2014). Performance Gaps between Online and Face-to-face
Courses: Differences across Types of Students and Academic Subject Areas. Journal of
Higher Education, 85(5), 633–659.