About the integration of b-learning in EPP to reinforce learner autonomy

Irina Argüelles Álvarez

Spain

Universidad Politécnica de Madrid

Submitted: 2010-10-06

|

Accepted: 2010-10-06

|

Published: 2010-10-06

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4995/rlyla.2009.730
Funding Data

Downloads

Keywords:

b-learning, MOODLE, autonomous learning, negotiated syllabus, material development

Supporting agencies:

This research was not funded

Abstract:

This article builds on one particular initiative that has been developed for over a year and brings b-learning to the English for Professional Purposes classroom within a learner-centred context. The first section is dedicated to the description of the conditions that have framed the experience. Then the steps taken to adapt the materials of the subject "Professional Communication" to the b-learning environment MOODLE are addressed. This part also examines the evolution of the subject towards autonomous language learning goals
and a negotiated syllabus design more suitable for b-learning. The third part of the paper outlines the results from the actual learning in the virtual environment of a pilot group of students. Qualitative data concerning the benefits of MOODLE within an autonomous learning context are presented. To conclude, it is suggested that prior analysis of each particular teaching situation is very important to decide whether MOODLE will in fact fulfil previous expectations.
Show more Show less

References:

Argüelles Álvarez, I. (2005). “Adaptación de materiales y TICs para el fomento del aprendizaje autónomo”. RESLA, 17-18: 19-33.

Argüelles Álvarez, I. (2006). “Algunas reflexiones sobre la participación de los alumnos en la adaptación de materiales para el aprendizaje autónomo”. TIC et autonomie dans l’apprentissage des langues. Melanges Crapel, 28: 177-190.

Clarke, D. (1991). “The negotiated syllabus: what is it about and how is it likely to work?” Applied Linguistics, 12-1: 13-28.

Coaten, N. (2003). “Blended e-learning”. Educaweb, 69, octubre de 2006.

Coterall, S. (1995). “Developing a course strategy for learner autonomy”. ELT Journal 49-3: 219-227.

Dickinson, L. (1987). Self instruction in language learning. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press: 68-87.

Driscoll, M. (2002). “Blended Learning: let´s get beyond the hype”. E-Learning, 1 March. http:// elearningmag.com/ltimagazine

Hammond, M. and R. Collins, (1991). Self-directed learning: Critical practice. London: Kogan Page.

Hofmann, J. (2001). Blended Learning Case Study. www.learningcircuits.org/2001/apr2001/ hofmann.html

Little, D. (1991). Learner autonomy. Definition, issues and problems. Dublin: Authentik.

Marsh, G., A. Mc Fadden and B. Price (2003). “Blended instruction: Adapting conventional instruction for large classes”. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, VI.

McDevitt, B. (1997). Learner autonomy and the need for learner training. Language Learning Journal, 16: 34-39.

Nunan, D. (1993). “Task-based syllabus design”. In G. Crookes and S. Gass (Eds.) Task in a pedagogical context: Integrating theory and practice. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters: 55-68.

Oliver, M, & K. Trigwell (2005). “Can blended learning be redeemed?” E-Learning, 2-1.

Singh, H. (2003). Building Effective Learning Programs. Educational Technology, 43.

Tudor, I. (1993). “Teacher roles in the learner-centred classroom” ELT Journal, 47-1: 22-31.

Whitelock, D. & Jelfs, A. (2003). “Editorial: Journal of Educational Media Special Issue on Blended Learning”. Journal of Educational Media, 28-2/3: 99-100.

Show more Show less