E-packs: blended learning at London Metropolitan University

1. E-packs: blended learning at London Metropolitan University Cécile Tschirhart and Elina Rigler Department of Humanities, Arts and Languages London Metropolitan University

2. Languages in HAL Language degrees: BA French, SLAS, German North Applied Translation & interpreting BA and MAs City MAs in TEFL, International ELT & Applied Language St North Open Language Programme City & North European & Language Services Pre-Sessionals EFL / EAP North English Language Centre City

3. OLP • Open Language Programme: 2500 students;450 external students • Institution-Wide Language Programme including language specialist degrees • 2 Language Centres: North Campus and City Campus • Student profile: approx 70% mature students; a large number of non-specialists

4. STAGES AND LEVELS French Spanish Italian German EFL Business English Japanese Arabic Mandarin Chinese 5 Stages from beginners to graduate 2 levels at each stage 1 level = 1 semester 1 2 1 2 1:1, 2:1, 3:1, 4:1, 5:1, 1:2, 2:2, 3:2, 4:2, 5:2

5. Background • 3-hour lesson plus minimum 3 hours of guided self-study - blended learning • Until 2001: 80 paper study packs in the LC used by students and corporate clients • Disadvantage: inadequate access to materials • Since 2001: development of e-packs and online packs • Link with Palgrave Foundation series

6. Format • 12 on-line sessions lasting 3 to 4 hours each • 9 or 10 originally designed interactive exercises • 1 extension work section • References to videos/CD-Roms/books/tapes • Links to other language learning sites plus instructions for a written task

7. Pedagogical Considerations • E-packs are designed with the communicative approach in mind (active learning in a multi-mediaenvironment; use of language in context) • Use of e-packs is intended to promote learner autonomy in a number of ways • Feedback is designed to reinforce the learning process • Integration of e-packs and taught classes: blended learning • Staff/student training and support

8. Availability • June 2005: French 1:1 (complete beginner) and 1:2 (post-beginner) Spanish 1:1 Italian: 1:1 • German 1.1 and Spanish 1.2 to be completed in September 2005

9. Evaluation • Quantitative surveys: 2003: 140 questionnaires 2004: 56 questionnaires • Qualitative survey (2005): One-to-one (semi-structured) interviews with 10 OLP students • Feedback from teachers (2005): Semi-structured questionnaire

10. How would you rate the experience of using the e-pack?

11. How does the e-pack contribute to the learning of the module?

12. Where do you use the e-packs?

13. Advantages over traditional self-study materials • Active learning in a multi-mediaenvironment: “It is helpful to have listening and reading in one exercise”. “I prefer interactive exercises.” • Individual learning strategies and styles:“Using e-packs makes learning more interesting; it is easier for me to learn with pictures”. • Feedback features: “Not getting direct answers can sometimes be frustrating, but it is more useful to have to work out the answers yourself”. • Repeating the exercises: “I like the fact that I can repeat the exercises over and over again, at my leisure. “I feel I’m making progress.”

14. Flexible access • One mature student with family and work responsibilities: “I find it more convenient to access the e-pack from home. I can do it whenever I have a bit of spare time”. • Another mature student, who works full time, uses it as a stand-alone study pack: “It’s really useful for people like me; without the e-pack I don’t think I would have done well.” • One student with a computer at home: “I like the flexibility of being able to use it both at home and at university”. • Another student without a computer at home: “The good thing is that the materials are easily accessible” [I.e. listening, reading and writing exercises integrated within the e-pack]

15. Do you do the extension work? “It doesn’t look attractive.” “I prefer games and interactive exercises.” “Other modules are a priority for me.” “I wasn’t aware of it.”

16. Do you do the written task? “Other courses are a priority for me.” “I didn’t know about it.”

17. Learner Autonomy • Most learners possess adequate IT and metacognitive skills • Individual differences: some students able to work completely independently; others need help and encouragement • Some activities may not suit their learning styles • Learners’ objectives may differ from those of the course

18. Problems with integration • Poor response to teacher survey • Not all teachers are familiar with e-packs or incorporate them into the lesson plan or encourage learners • Students could take more initiative in handing in written work, and finding out about advisory and other services. • More training and support???

19. Challenges for the future • Adequate funding for research and development • Finding content writers with ideas and pedagogical vision • Technical maintenance • Quality monitoring • Continuous staff development • Meeting learners’ needs

20. Advice • Define realistic technical specifications • Merge technical and pedagogical expertise • Select multimedia-sensitive authors • Save time and money by creating templates • Use a recycling approach to writing materials • Seek external funding • Think carefully about staff and student training and support