With the development of technology emerged new teaching and learning techniques based on the use of a computer, television channels, and different electronic media. Thus, blended learning is a very powerful instrument in language learning, but it introduces some difficulties for teachers and students.
First of all, it is necessary to point out that the use of electronic media is an inevitable process that must be taken into control rather than ignored, especially within language learning. As Chapelle (2001, 1)suggests language is “so tied to technology” that using technology during learning “has become a fact of life”. Thus, technology is to serve in language learning, and one of its effective use is “a lesson plan”, which is “essentially a matrix mapping of activities along a timeline” (Falconer & Littlejohn 2007, 44). These lesson plans can be very useful for sharing experiences among teachers. A successful lesson, where every goal was reached and students learned the necessary material, is to be memorized, in order to be repeated by the same teacher, and to be shared so that other teachers could use some of the methods used during the lesson. But these lesson plans have their drawbacks, for it is almost impossible to enlighten all the means of introducing material and construct the most explicit plan since it has a quite linear structure, and, moreover, not every teacher will pay attention to the most important parts of the lesson, thus, the integrity of the whole scope of methods used during the lesson can collapse and become less explicit.
Another obstacle in blended learning can be provoked by the technical problems, which students have to face very often, and sometimes “resolving technical issues” rather than studying (Murday, Ushida and, Chenoweth 2008, 130). And apart from getting worse results from students, teachers can also meet the negative attitude from the student’s side, since the latter regard the teachers as being responsible for these technical troubles (Chambers & Stephen 2006, 476.). Students can also be reluctant to study through the internet or using a computer due to simply eyestrain or because they prefer studying with books and making notes, thus, involving their tactile experiences. It is also necessary to point out that some students were less active during such lessons, thus, the teacher could not control their learning. And it is important to point out that the necessary technology is not so very available, and thus not many skillful teachers and committed students can afford to use them. But, of course, it is necessary to admit that these technologies become more available, so in the nearest future, this issue will vanish.
But even teachers face the necessity of self-control in the improvement of their teaching skills via electronic media (Mansvelt, Suddaby and O’Hara 2008, 580). But what is more important materials for such development grow older very soon, due to the rapid development of technology and society itself. So this education should be definitely supported by the classical forms of professional improvement as Greg Kessler puts it (2007, 184). Moreover, the studies held on the topic reveal that a lot of people use such kinds of resources using them partially, for instance, making stress on the theoretical material, omitting the practical issues (Kupetz & Ziegenmeyer 2005, 194). Another point for the necessity to give portions of media-learning to students voice Davis and Fill (2007, 825-826), who underlines that students can oppose total interactive studying, since face-to-face learning cannot be underestimated, at least at present.
A very useful perspective of blended learning is sharing lessons within several educational establishments. Several Universities implemented such programs, which were successful, but still, the teachers faced quite a serious obstacle. Such projects, first of all, need considerable funds which are to be gained by the management of the Universities, so they should be committed to the program implementation. These projects also require a very thoughtful approach to schedule forming. But it is necessary to point out, that these lessons are very effective and students become very enthusiastic and even prove that “given the tools and the time needed, they will take the initiative to become active language learners” (Adair-Hauck, Willingham-McLain and Youngs 1999, 292). The students participating in such projects even can form different groups to help each other in learning to show better results during the interactive lessons.
But, of course, exist some difficulties students may face during interactive lessons or e-lessons, for instance. Students can feel like putting a question to a teacher on some topic discussed but they don’t have the opportunity to do it at once. And they can forget to ask the teacher during the next face-to-face lesson. And such unanswered questions may accumulate into a really grave lack of knowledge. Thereby students do not comprehend the necessary material in a proper way, and the teacher can fail to notice the student’s difficulties in a particular material, and both get negative results: poor knowledge of students. So teachers should pay more attention during face-to-face lessons and reveal the most difficult parts, or research and note the most frequently asked questions, in order to avoid any gaps.
Another disputable point is the evaluation of knowledge, using tests. First of all, taking tests itself evokes different arguments, for example, machines can only fit the answer to the appropriate algorithm in the program, and can never evaluate the whole scope of knowledge of a student, which is possible during the classic conversation with a teacher. Another point is that not each student is accustomed to keyboard and mouse answering, and for the best result needs a pen and paper to express one’s thought, and simple communication to bring one’s ideas. And the most important issue within the test is the uncertainty with the security of the results, for a lot of hackers can break down the system and interfere with the evaluation process (Douglas & Hegelheimer 2007, 126). Of course, the majority of existing programs claim that they are totally secure but the work in this field should never stop.
Thus, it is necessary to conclude that blended learning is becoming a part of the educational system, especially as far as language learning is concerned. Modern technology provides a lot of possibilities to start learning or improve language learning. It can be very helpful for students who are very committed to learning and need more information. But as Sharma and Barrett (2007, 34) stress, nevertheless, it is important to understand that blended learning is a supplementary means in language learning, and can never replace face-to-face study. A lot of work should be carried out by experienced teachers to share their skills via modern technology, which should be improved as well. Teachers should be more initiative implementing projects of introducing blended learning techniques, a lot of research should be done to find out the most effective methods of such kind of learning.
References
Adair-Hauck, B., Willingham-McLain, L., Youngs, B.E.1999. Evaluating the Integration of Technology and Second Language Learning. CALICO Journal 17 (2): 269-306.
Chambers, A., Stephen, B. 2006. Making CALL work: Towards normalization. Science Direct 34: 465-479.
Chapelle, C.A. 2001. Computer Applications in Second Language Acquisition. Foundations for teaching, testing and research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Davis, H.C. and Fill, K. 2007. Embedding blended learning in a university’s teaching culture: experiences and reflections. British Journal of Educational Technology 38 (5): 817-828.
Douglas, D. and Hegelheimer, V. 2007. Assessing Language Using Computer Technology. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 27: 115-132.
Falconer, I. and Littlejohn, A. 2007. Designing for blended learning, sharing and reuse. Journal of Further and Higher Education 31 (1): 41-52.
Kessler G. 2007. Formal and Informal CALL. Preparation and Teacher Attitude Toward Technology. Computer Assisted Language Learning. 20 (2): 173-188.
Kupetz, R., Ziegenmeyer, B. 2005. Blended learning in a teacher training course: Integrated interactive e-learning and contact learning. ReCALL 17 (2): 179-196.
Mansvelt, J., Suddaby, G. and O’Hara, D. 2008. Learning how to e-teach? Staff perspectives on formal and informal professional development activity. Proceedings Ascilite Melbourne: 577-581.
Murday, K., Ushida, E., Chenoweth, N.A. 2008. Learners’ and teachers’ perspectives on language online. Computer Assisted Language Learning 21 (2): 125-142.
Sharma, P. and Barrett, B. 2007. Review of Blended Learning: Using technology in and beyond the language classroom. Oxford: Macmillan Publishers Limited.