Focus on Students: A Blended Business English Writing Class in Sabah
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11113/jt.v65.2347Keywords:
Blended learning, business english, activity theoryAbstract
Blended learning (BL) has scored itself numerous zoom-in sessions in language teaching and learning discussions as it globally evolves rapidly as one of the leading 21st century learning approaches in Higher Education Institutes (HEIs). BL has just begun to be introduced in a private higher education institution in Sabah, despite its global acclaim. In this study, the effectiveness of a BL approach with first year Diploma in Commerce Students (N=30) in learning Business English writing skills was investigated. The BL approach involved a combination of traditional face-to-face classroom activities such as lectures, group discussions, individual consultations/ explanations with digital classroom activities such as discussion threads, online responses and links to relevant articles, videos and interactive website through Schoology©. Quantitative as well as qualitative methodologies were employed in this study for data elicitation, which includes pre and post achievement tests, questionnaires and interviews to explore the issues of learning, course management and challenges faced in operating the BL approach. A fundamental analytical lens- Engeström’s Activity Theory was employed in this study and was most useful in revealing overall positive views from students as well as certain limitations within the system. The findings showed that what was uncovered about the relevance of the BL approach might just be the tip of the iceberg.References
Alexander, B. 2006. Web 2.0: A New Wave of Innovation for Teaching and Learning? Educause Review.
Aviles, K., Philips, B., Rosenblatt, T. & Vargas, J. 2005. If Higher Education Listened to Me. Educause Review.
Brown, J. S. 2002. Growing Up Digital. USDLA Journal. 16(2).
Cole, M. & Engeström, Y. 1993. A Cultural-historical Approach to Distributed Cognition.
Diaz, V. & Strickland, J. (n.d.) ELI Discovery Tool: Blended Learning Workshop Guide. Retrieved April 01, 2012 from http://www.educause.edu/blendedlearning.
Diaz, V. and Brown, M. 2010. Blended Learning: A report on the ELI Focus Session. Educause Learning Initiative.
Dziuban, C. & Moskal, P. 2011. A Course is a Course is a Course: Factor Invariance in Student Evaluation of Online, Blended and Face-to-Face Learning Environments. The Internet and Higher Education. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.05.003.
Dziuban, C. D., Hartman, J. L. & Moskal, P. D. 2004. Blended Learning. Research Bulletin, Issue 7. EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research.
Engeström, Y. 1987. Learning by Expanding: An Activity-Theoretical Approach to Developmental Research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.
Engeström, Y., & Sannino, A. 2010. Studies of Expansive Learning: Foundations, Findings and Future Challenges. Educational Research Review. 5(1): 1–24.
Garrison, R. & Vaughan, N. 2007. Blended Learning and Course Redesign in Higher Education: Assessing the Role of Teaching Presence from the Learner Perspective. Teaching and Learning Centre; University of Calgary.
Gosmire, D., Morrison, M. & Osdel, J. V. 2009. Perceptions of Interactions in Online Courses. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching. 5(4).
Holley, D., & Oliver, M. 2009. Student Engagement and Blended Learning: Portraits of Risk. Computers & Education. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.08.035.
Karasavvidis. I (n.d.) Activity Theory as a Theoretical Framework for the Study of Blended Learning: A Case Study in Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Networked Learning.
Manning, C, W. Brooks, V. Crotteau, A. Diedrich, J. Moser, and A. Zweifelhofer. 2011. Tech Tools for Teacher, by Teachers: Bridging Teachers and In-Service Teacher. Wisconsin English Journal. 53(1): 24–28.
Prensky M. 2007. How to Teach With Technology: Keeping Both Teachers And Students Comfortable In An Era Of Exponential Change. Emerging Technologies for Learning. Volume 2. British Educational Communications and Technology Agency (Becta).
Prensky, M. 2002. Evolving Instruction? Seven Challenges. On the Horizon. 10(2).
Prensky, M. 2005 "Engage Me or Enrage Me" What Today’s Learners Demand. Educause Review.
Prensky, M. 2007. Changing Paradigms from “Being Taught†to “Learning on Your Own with Guidanceâ€. Educational Technology.
Tamarkin, M. 2010. You 3.0: The Most Important Evolving Technology. Educause Review.
Tapscott, D., & Williams, A. 2010. Innovating the 21st Century University: It’s Time. Educause Review. 45(1): 16–29.
Windham, C. 2005. Father Google & Mother IM: Confessions of a Net Gen Learner. Educause Review.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright of articles that appear in Jurnal Teknologi belongs exclusively to Penerbit Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (Penerbit UTM Press). This copyright covers the rights to reproduce the article, including reprints, electronic reproductions, or any other reproductions of similar nature.
