Impact and reactions to a blended MA course on Language Education and Technology

George Ypsilandis


The subject of computers in language learning was not covered at a postgraduate level in Greece independently but as an add-on module in more broad programmes, such as applied linguistics or TEFL. In such programmes, this module was merely scratching the surface of the subject, leaving students with the impression that there was no more to it than learning to run a software programme or an application. The MA programme on Language Education and Technology (LET) was the first in the country that aimed to offer a specialised course with all its modules directly related to the area. Furthermore, the programme attempted to incorporate a number of novelties in the personnel involved (experts from six different countries), methods of teaching (blended, through face-to-face, and synchronous web teleconferencing), transparency (as to the use and allocation of the fees and student selection), systems of examination, modes of collaboration, and modules and seminars offered, all directly linked to its title.

The study described here aimed to shed light and estimate the impact of the course on the professional life of its participants through several open and closed questions included in a questionnaire, constructed to register student status before and after the programme, and their opinions on several other programme features. Students scored very positively a) module development, b) the instructors that were involved, c) the modules offered, and d) the knowledge they gained. Some of the students presented their final papers at international conferences, four were accepted in PhD studies in Spain, the UK and Austria, with scholarships from the host institution, while others increased their salaries, or found a new better paid job.


Computer-assisted language learning; master’s degree; teaching methods

Full Text:



Badawi, M. F. (2009). Using blended learning for enhanced EFL prospective teachers' pedagogical knowledge and performance. Proceedings of the Learning & Language Conference - The Spirit of the Age. Cairo: Ain Shams University.

Bonk, C.J. & Graham, C.R. (2006). The handbook of blended learning environments: Global perspectives, local designs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.

Chan, C. T. & Koh, Y.Y. (2008). Different Degrees of blending benefit students differently: A Pilot Study. Proceedings of the EDU-COM 2008 InternationalConference, 19-21 November 2008. Retrieved from

Delialioglu, O. & Yilklirim, Z. (2007). Student's Perceptions on Effective Dimensions of Interactive Learning in a Blended Learning Environment. Educational Technology & Society, 10(2), 133-146.

Driscoll, M. (2002). Blended learning: Let's get beyond the hype. E-learning, 1(4), 1-4.

Garnham, C. & Kaleta, R. (2002) Introduction to hybrid courses. Teaching with Technology Today, 8(6), 1-2.

Garrison, D.R. & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), pp. 95-105.

Gulbahar, Y. & Madran, O. (2009). Communication and collaboration, satisfaction, equity, and autonomy in blended learning environments: A case from Turkey. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 10(2), 1-22.

Islam, K. (2002). Is e-learning floundering: Identifying shortcomings and preparing for success. E-Learning Magazine, pp. 22-26

Kambakis-Vougiouklis, P., Vougiouklis, T. (2008). Bar instead of scale. Ratio Sociologica , 3, 49-56.

Kambakis-Vougiouklis, P., Nikolaidou, P. & Vougiouklis, T. (2017). Questionnaires in Linguistics Using the Bar and the H v-Structures. In Maturo, A., Hoskova-Mayerova, S., Soitu, D.T. & Kacprzyk, J. (Eds). Recent Trends in Social Systems: Quantitative Theories and Quantitative Models. Studies in Systems, Decision and Control, 66. Springer International Publishing AG Switzerland.

Li K. & Zhao J. (2004). The Theory and Applied Model of Blended Learning. E-Education Research, 7, 1-6.

Naaj, M., Nachouki, M. & Ankit, A. (2012). Evaluating student satisfaction with blended learning in a gender-segregated environment. Journal of InformationTechnology Education: Research, 11(1), 185-200.

Oliver, M. & K. Trigwell (2005). Can 'Blended Learning' Be Redeemed? E-Learning, 2, 17-26.

Osguthorpe, R. & C.R. Graham (2003) . Blended Learning Environments, Definitions and Directions. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 4(3), pp. 227-233.

Picciano, A.G. (2006). Blended learning: Implications for growth and access. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 10(3), 95-102.

Singh, H., & Reed, C. (2001). A white paper: Achieving success with blended learning. Centra software, 1, 1-11.

So, H. J. & Brush, T.A. (2008). Student perceptions of collaborative learning, social presence and satisfaction in a blended learning environment: Relationships and critical factors. Computers & Education, 51(1), 318-336.

Thorne, K. (2003). Blended learning: How to integrate online and traditional learning. London: Kogan Page.

Ypsilandis, G.S. (2005). Language Teaching, Language Learning: Current Trends and Practices. Keynote published with the proceedings of the 1st ESP Conference on Teaching English For Specific Purposes: A Trend or A Demand? Ziti Publications, pp. 31-40.

Ypsilandis, G.S. (2006). On feedback provision strategies in CALL software. Keynote published in the Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Motivation in Learning Language for Specific and Academic Purposes. Thessaloniki: University of Macedonia Press.

Ypsilandis, G.S. (2018). The MA program on Language Education and Technology: A Global Endeavour. Proceedings of the International Conference on Innovation in Language Learning. Pixel Publications. Available from

Abstract Views

Metrics Loading ...

Metrics powered by PLOS ALM


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Licencia Creative Commons

This journal is licensed under a  Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

Universitat Politècnica de València

e-ISSN: 1695-2618