Understanding the Blended Learning Experiences of English Language Teachers in a Distance TESL Degree Programme in Malaysia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11113/jt.v65.2350Keywords:
Blended learning, distance learning degree, learning experiences, schoology learning management system, activity theoryAbstract
In an effort to improve the status and the professional qualification of non-graduate primary school teachers, the Ministry of Education, Malaysia recently mandated a large scale change effort to upgrade non-graduate teachers to become graduate teachers via a a specially designed distant education degree programme, called the Graduate Programme for Teachers (Program Pensiswazahan Guru also known as PPG in Malay language) using a blended format involving part face-to-face (F2F) and distance learning. This paper examines the learning experiences of the first cohort of TESL teachers undergoing the blended learning (BL) courses. Specifically, learning experiences were examined in the form of (1) the in-service teachers’ perception towards the BL approach, and (2) the learning experiences supporting or impeding their learning using the BL approach. To gain an appreciation of the in-service teachers’ experience with the BL system, both qualitative and quantitative techniques were used, namely a survey consisting of open and closed questions, focus groups interviews and reflective journals. Findings revealed the teachers generally have positive perceptions of the blended course design. However, when viewed through the theoretical lens of Activity Theory (AT), data revealed tensions both between and within the components of the activity system in the BL environment. The paper concludes that further fine-tuning needs to be taken to ameliorate the challenges faced, particularly the contradictions and tensions involving issues related to willingness and attitudes towards learning the courses (object/outcome component); Schoology and learning materials (Mediating tools); collaboration (Rules) and opinions related to ‘teacher’s presence’ (Division of Labour).
References
Abraham, A. 2007. Student Centred Teaching of Accounting to Engineering In-Service Teachers: Comparing Blended Learning with Traditional Approaches. Proceedings of ASCILITE. 1–9.
Blin, F. & Munro, M. 2008. Why Hasn’t Technology Disrupted Academics’ Teaching Practices? Understanding Resistance to Change Through the Lens of Activity Theory. Computers & Education. 50: 475–490.
Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI). 2005. E-learning in Tertiary Education: Where Do We Stand? Paris: OCDE Publishing.
Cole, M. 1996. Cultural Psychology: A Once and Future Discipline. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Duffy, T. M. & Kirkley, J. R. 2004. Learning Theory and Pedagogy Applied in Distance Learning: The Case of Cardean University. In T. M. Duffy & J. R. Kirkley (Eds.). Learner-centered Theory and Practice in Distance Education. Cases From Higher Education Mahwah, New Jersey: LEA. 107–141.
Dyke, M., Conole, G., Ravenscroft, A. & de Freitas, S. 2007. Learning theory and its application to e- learning. In G. Conole & M. Oliver (Eds). Contemporary Perspectives in E-Learning Research: Themes, Methods and Impact on Practice. London: Routledge. 82–97.
Engeström, Y. 1987. Learning by Expanding: An Activity-Theoretical Approach to Developmental Research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.
Engeström, Y. 1990. Activity Theory and Individual and Social Transformation. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, & R. Punamaki, (Eds.). Perspectives on Activity Theory. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. 19–38.
Joyes, G. 2006. An Activity Theory Approach to the Exploration of Tutors' Perceptions of Effective Online Pedagogy. In L. Markauskaite, P. Goodyear, & P. Reimann (Eds), Who's learning? Whose Technology? Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Conference of the Australiasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education Sydney: Sydney University Press. http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/sydney06/proceeding/pdf_papers/p221.pdf [Viewed 23 January 2013]. 401–408.
Leont’ev, A. 1981. Problems of the Development of Mind. Moscow: Progress.
Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. 2004. Blended Learning: Uncovering Its Transformative Potential in Higher Education. The Internet and Higher Education. 7(2): 95–105.
Gedera, D. S. & Williams, P. J. 2013. Using Activity Theory to Understand Contradictions in an Online University Course Facilitated by Moodle. International Journal of Information Technology & Computer Science. 10(1).
Ginns, P., & Ellis, R. A. 2009. Evaluating The Quality of E-Learning at the Degree Level in the Student Experience of Blended Learning. British Journal of Educational Technology. 40(4): 652–663.
Gulc, E. (2006). Using Blended Learning to Accommodate Different Learning Styles. Retrieved 5 January 2011. from:http://www.business.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/landt/learning/blended/gulc.doc
Kuutti, K. 1996. Activity Theory as a Potential Framework for Human Computer Interaction Research. In B. A. Nardi (Ed.) Context and Consciousness: Activity Theory and Human Computer Interaction. Cambridge: MIT press. 17–44.
Leakey, J. & Ranchoux, A. 2006: BLINGUA. A Blended Language Learning Approach for CALL. Computer Assisted Language Learning. 19(4–5): 357–372.
Lim, D. H., & Morris, M. L. 2009. Learner and Instructional Factors Influencing Learning Outcomes within a Blended Learning Environment. Educational Technology & Society. 12(4): 282–293.
Lincoln, Y. S. & Guba, E. G. 1985. Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills, California: Sage Publications.
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 Teachers. Wisconsin English Journal. 53(1): 24–28.
Maguire, C., & Zhang, J. 2006. Defining Blended Learning in the GDLN Context. Guide Book on “Effective Blended Learning For Developmentâ€. Retrieved October 21, 2009. from http://www.jointokyo.org/files/cms/news/pdf/s3_blended_v6.pdf.
Mitchell, P., & Forer, P. 2010. Blended learning: the perceptions of first-year geography students. Journal of Geography in Higher Education. 34(1): 77–89.
Moebs, S. and Weibelzahl, S. 2006. Towards a Good Mix In Blended Learning for Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises–Outline of a Delphi Study. Proceedings of the Workshop on Blended Learning and SMEs held in conjunction with the 1st European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning Crete, Greece. 1–6.
Oliver, M., Roberts, C., Beetham, H., Ingraham, B., Dyke, M. & Levy, P. 2007. Knowledge, Society and Perspectives on Learning Technology. In G. Conole & M. Oliver (Eds). Contemporary Perspectives in E-Learning Research: Themes, Methods and Impact on Practice London: Routledge. 21–37.
Sharpe, R., & Benfield, G. 2005. The Student Experience of E-Learning in Higher Education: A Review of the Literature. Brookes E-Journal of Learning and Teaching, 1, 3. Retrieved February 19, 2012, from http://
www.brookes.ac.uk/publications/bejlt/volume1issue3/academic/sharpe_benfield .html.
Sharpe, R., Benfield, G. & Francis, R. 2006. Implementing a University E-Learning Strategy: Levers for Change within Academic Schools. ALT-J. 14(2): 135–151.
Singh, H. 2003. Building Effective Blended Learning Program. Educational Technology. 43(6): 51–54.
Singh, T. 2010. Creating Opportunities for Students in Large Cohorts to Reflect in and on Practice: Lessons Learnt from a Formative Evaluation of Students’ Experiences of a Technology-Enhanced Blended Learning Design. British Journal of Educational Technology. 41(2): 271–286.
Teacher Education Division, Ministry of Education Malaysia. 2012. Briefing about Graduate Teacher Program under 10th Malaysian Plan at Tengku Ampuan Afzan Institute of Teacher Education. Retrieved August 19, 2013 from https://www.google.com.my/#bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&fp=28d5112040ac5019&q=program+pensiswazahan+guru+sekolah+rendah+ppt.
Wold, K. A. 2011. Blending Theories For Instructional Design: Creating and Implementing The Structure, Environment, Experience, and People (SEEP) Model. Computer Assisted Language Learning. 24(4): 371–382.
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.
