Abstract
This study aimed to highlights the correlation between blended learning and student’ autonomy from English teacher perspectives, the researcher tried to find out the influence of some of variables such as gender, years of experience and qualification. The study showed that most teachers shed the light on the use of blended learning to attract student's attention to the class and the teachers' as well it also showed that the study recommend more emphasis on using blended learning and how can student and teacher as get benefit from it to enhance learning and teaching process.
”
” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ”,” ” ” ” .” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ”.” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ”.
1. Introduction
Over the last two decades, the concepts of learner autonomy and independence have gained momentum, the former becoming a 'buzz-word' within the context of language learning (Little, 1991: 2). It is a truism that one of the most important spin-offs of more communicatively oriented language learning and teaching has been the premium placed on the role of the learner in the language learning process (see Wenden, 1998: xi). It goes without saying, of course, that this shift of responsibility from teachers to learners does not exist in a vacuum, but is the result of a concatenation of changes to the curriculum itself towards a more learner-centred kind of learning. What is more, this reshaping, so to speak, of teacher and learner roles has been conducive to a radical change in the age-old distribution of power and authority that used to plague the traditional classroom. Cast in a new perspective and regarded as having the 'capacity for detachment, critical reflection, decision-making, and independent action' (Little, 1991: 4), learners, autonomous learners, that is, are expected to assume greater responsibility for, and take charge of, their own learning. However, learner autonomy does not mean that the teacher becomes redundant, abdicating his/her control over what is transpiring in the language learning process. In the present study, it will be shown that learner autonomy is a perennial dynamic process amenable to 'educational interventions' (Candy, 1991), rather than a static product, a state, which is reached once and for all. Besides, what permeates this study is the belief that 'in order to help learners to assume greater control over their own learning it is important to help them to become aware of and identify the strategies that they already use or could potentially use' (Holmes & Ramos, 1991, cited in James & Garrett, 1991: 198). At any rate, individual learners differ in their learning habits, interests, needs, and motivation, and develop varying degrees of independence throughout their lives (Tumposky, 1982).
Statement of the problem.
The problem statement is formulated in the following question:
What are the problems of teaching vocabulary for ninth grade in Hebron schools from the English language teachers' point of view?
Questions of the study
The study will address the following questions :
1. What are the problems of teaching vocabulary for high school students in Hebron schools from the English language teachers' point of view?
2.Are there statically significant differences between teachers' about difficulties of teaching vocabulary for high school students in Hebron schools from the English language teachers' point of view attributed to their gender, academic qualification and experience ?
Purpose of the Study
The main purpose of the study is to highlight the problems that face students in learning English vocabulary from English language teachers' point of view in Hebron schools.
Significance of the Study
Because of the new trends of the importance of teaching English as a foreign language in schools and high institutions and because of new methods are getting more and more popular and widely used, there are always needs for development in order to reach the teaching ‘learning process to the top point . Although schools are working hard to update their educational strategies by introducing more methods and various techniques , there are several problems emerging widely in the area of vocabulary teaching . These problems need to be solved and encountered . So the researcher will conduct the recent research in order to find these problems of teaching vocabulary and put some suitable solutions .
Limitations of the study
There are three major limitations to this study:
1- The study focuses only on the problems of teaching vocabulary that face students in learning English from English language teachers' point of view in Hebron schools.
2- It is limited to the Nablus schools teachers who filled the study tool.
3-The results of the study, accordingly, will apply only to the respondents and schools that are directly involved in the current investigation about the difficulties that face students in learning English.
Definition of Terms
Vocabulary :
This research has been subdivided into four parts. Part one will introduce the theory and concepts of ‘learner autonomy’, how it is often misinterpreted and gives a brief explanation. Part two will analyze the benefits that technology can give the language learner in today’s society. The third section of this research will be based around ‘blended learning’ and how technology is used to enhance and develop the autonomous learner. Specific research questions in the field of learner autonomy, blended learning and technology in education will be addressed in the final section of this research.
Learner Autonomy
A large literature on autonomy in language learning now exists, with Holec (1981) commonly cited as a seminal contribution to the field. Benson (2011) provides a comprehensive analysis of key issues in learner autonomy, Our analysis of this work highlights a number of key and often interlinked themes:
‘ The nature of learner autonomy ‘ how to define it and what it involves
‘ The rationale for promoting learner autonomy in FL learning
‘ The role of the teacher in learner autonomy
‘ Institutional and individual constraints on learner autonomy
‘ The meanings of learner autonomy in diverse cultural contexts
‘ Individualistic vs. social perspectives on learner autonomy
‘ The kinds of learning opportunities that foster learner autonomy.
Holec’s (1981: 3) early and still influential definition of learner autonomy was ‘the ability to take charge of one’s learning to have, and to hold, the responsibility for all the decisions concerning all aspects of this learning’ and the specific decisions he listed were:
‘ determining the objectives
‘ defining the contents and progressions
‘ selecting methods and techniques to be used
‘ monitoring the procedure of acquisition
‘ evaluating what has been acquired.
Sinclair (2000) similarly suggests 13 aspects of learner autonomy which ‘appear to have been recognised and broadly accepted by the language
teaching profession’ .
1. Autonomy is a construct of capacity
2. Autonomy involves a willingness on the part of the learner to take responsibility for their own learning
3. The capacity and willingness of learners to take such responsibility is not necessarily innate
4. Complete autonomy is an idealistic goal
5. There are degrees of autonomy
6. The degrees of autonomy are unstable and variable
7. Autonomy is not simply a matter of placing learners in situations where they have to be independent
8. Developing autonomy requires conscious awareness of the learning process ‘ i.e. conscious reflection and decision-making
9. Promoting autonomy is not simply a matter of teaching strategies
10. Autonomy can take place both inside and outside the classroom
11. Autonomy has a social as well as an individual dimension
12. The promotion of autonomy has a political as well as psychological dimension
13. Autonomy is interpreted differently by different cultures.
To conclude this discussion of the theoretical background to this study, then, the points we want to emphasize are that:
1. Learner autonomy is established as a central concept in the field of FL learning.
2. There is a large literature on learner autonomy which, though, awards limited attention to FL teachers’ beliefs about this concept.
3. Understanding such beliefs is central to the process of understanding and promoting changes in the extent to which teachers’ promote learner autonomy in their work.
Learner autonomy is when students take control and responsibility for their own learning, both in terms of what they learn and how they learn it. It takes as its starting point the idea that students are capable of self-direction and are able to develop an independent, proactive approach to their studies.
In the field of higher education, learner autonomy is particularly important. Students may have limited classroom contact time for learning English but they may need to rapidly increase their knowledge and skills. It is therefore important for them to become self-reliant language learners who can continue learning efficiently outside the classroom.
At the heart of autonomous learning is the student’s perception of their own role as a learner. Classroom discussion and one-to-one conversations with the teacher can help students to understand the essential part that they play in their own success in English. Establish that autonomous, dynamic students have the potential to learn far more than passive, reactive learners. Self-reliant students can address their own individual needs and make ongoing progress.
Autonomy involves students having a range of learning strategies which they are able to apply flexibly in different contexts. Teachers can help students to develop learning strategies through learner training in the classroom and this can take many forms. Encourage them to reflect on the process in class. This can help students to transfer skills beyond the classroom and become more resourceful and autonomous learners.
Methodology
Research Questions
This project addressed the following questions:
1. What does ‘learner autonomy’ mean to English language teachers?
2. To what extent, according to the teachers, does learner autonomy contribute to L2 learning?
3. How desirable and feasible do teachers feel it is to promote learner autonomy?
4. To what extent do teachers feel their learners are autonomous?
5. To what extent do teachers say they actually promote learner autonomy?
6. What challenges do teachers face in helping their learners become more autonomous?
One strategy for data collection was used ‘ a questionnaire.
The Questionnaire
Questionnaires are, often seen to be an easy option for collecting data in research with teachers. It is true that they offer several advantages compared to, for example, interviews: questionnaires can be administered relatively economically, can reach a large number of participants and can be analyzed quickly.
What is Autonomy?
For a definition of autonomy, we might quote Holec (1981: 3, cited in Benson & Voller, 1997: 1) who describes it as 'the ability to take charge of one's learning'. On a general note, the term autonomy has come to be used in at least five ways (see Benson & Voller, 1997: 2):
‘ for situations in which learners study entirely on their own;
‘ for a set of skills which can be learned and applied in self-directed learning;
‘ for an inborn capacity which is suppressed by institutional education;
‘ for the exercise of learners' responsibility for their own learning;
‘ for the right of learners to determine the direction of their own learning.
It is noteworthy that autonomy can be thought of in terms of a departure from education as a social process, as well as in terms of redistribution of power attending the construction of knowledge and the roles of the participants in the learning process. Holec (1983), defines autonomy in terms of the learner's willingness and capacity to control or oversee her own learning. More specifically, like Holec, holds that someone qualifies as an autonomous learner when he independently chooses aims and purposes and sets goals; chooses materials, methods and tasks; exercises choice and purpose in organising and carrying out the chosen tasks; and chooses criteria for evaluation.
To all intents and purposes, the autonomous learner takes a (pro-) active role in the learning process, generating ideas and availing himself of learning opportunities, rather than simply reacting to various stimuli of the teacher (Boud, 1988; Kohonen, 1992; Knowles, 1975). As we shall see, this line of reasoning operates within, and is congruent with, the theory of constructivism. For Rathbone (1971: 100, 104, cited in Candy, 1991: 271), the autonomous learner is a self-activated maker of meaning, an active agent in his own learning process. He is not one to whom things merely happen; he is the one who, by his own volition, causes things to happen. Learning is seen as the result of his own self-initiated interaction with the world.
Within such a conception, learning is not simply a matter of rote memorisation; 'it is a constructive process that involves actively seeking meaning from (or even imposing meaning on) events' (Candy, 1991: 271).
Such "inventories" of characteristics evinced by the putative autonomous learner abound, and some would say that they amount to nothing more than a romantic ideal which does not square with reality. This stands to reason, for most of the characteristics imputed to the "autonomous learner" encapsulate a wide range of attributes not commonly associated with learners. For instance, Benn (1976, cited in Candy, 1991: 102) likens the autonomous learner to one '[w]hose life has a consistency that derives from a coherent set of beliefs, values, and principles–[and who engages in a] still-continuing process of criticism and re-evaluation', while Rousseau ([1762] 1911, cited in Candy, 1991: 102) regards the autonomous learner as someone who 'is obedient to a law that he prescribes to himself'. Within the context of education, though, there seem to be seven main attributes characterising autonomous learners (see Omaggio, 1978, cited in Wenden, 1998: 41-42):
1. Autonomous learners have insights into their learning styles and strategies;
2. take an active approach to the learning task at hand;
3. are willing to take risks, i.e., to communicate in the target language at all costs;
4. are good guessers;
5. attend to form as well as to content, that is, place importance on accuracy as well as appropriacy;
6. develop the target language into a separate reference system and are willing to revise and reject hypotheses and rules that do not apply; and
7. have a tolerant and outgoing approach to the target language.
Here, some comments with respect to the preceding list are called for. The points briefly touched upon above are necessary but not sufficient conditions for the development of learner autonomy, and many more factors such as learner needs, motivation, learning strategies, and language awareness have to be taken into consideration. For example, the first point hinges upon a metalanguage that learners have to master in order to be regarded as autonomous, while points 4) and 7) pertain to learner motivation. In view of this, an attempt will be made, in subsequent sections, to shed some light on some of the parameters affecting, and interfering with, learners' self-image as well as their capacity and will to learn. It is of consequence to note that autonomy is a process, not a product. One does not become autonomous; one only works towards autonomy. One corollary of viewing autonomy in this way is the belief that there are some things to be achieved by the learner, as well as some ways of achieving these things, and that autonomy 'is learned at least partly through educational experiences [and interventions]' (Candy, 1991: 115). But prior to sifting through the literature and discussing learning strategies, motivation, and attitudes entertained by learners, it would be pertinent to cast learner autonomy in relation to dominant philosophical approaches to learning. The assumption is that what is dubbed as learner autonomy and the extent to which it is a permissible and viable educational goal are all too often 'based on [and thus constrained by] particular conceptions of the constitution of knowledge itself' (Benson, 1997, cited in Benson & Voller, 1997: 20).
Theoretical Background:
What Is Blended Learning?
Blended learning (BL) or (sometimes called hybrid) education has been
defined in many ways and by different authors. However, almost all definitions shared the core concept of BL which is mixing two components: face-to-face teaching and online education.
Rossett and Frazee (2005) believe that blended learning ‘integrates
seemingly opposite approaches, such as formal and informal learning, faceto-face and online experiences, directed paths and reliance on self-direction, and digital references and collegial connections, in order to achieve individual and organizational goals’ (p. 2).
Sharma (2010) gives three relevant definitions for BL. The first definition
combines face-to-face and online teaching, whereas the second definition
includes a combination of technologies. Finally, he defines it as a combination of methodologies regardless of the learning technology used. Furthermore, Akkoyunlu and Soylu (2004) define BL as ‘a type of education which combines various models of traditional and distance education and makes use of all types of technology. In other words, blended learning has come to be understood as a combination of conventional classroom instruction and e-learning. Blended Learning processes are thus articulated by combining online learning and traditional approaches in various degrees’ (P. 3). By the same token, Garrison and Kanuka (2004) provide this definition for BL: ‘At its simplest, blended learning is the thoughtful integration of classroom face-to-face learning experiences with online learning experiences.
Other authors like ‘G”lbahar and Madran (2009), Rovai and Jordan
(2004), Thorne (2003), and Yildirim (2007) define blended learning as
‘a mixture of online learning or web-based training with face-to-face
communication and more traditional methods of learning and teaching’ (cited in Aguilar, 2012, p. 168).
It might seem that many authors have harmonious definitions of BL
and have reached a consensus regarding its basic concepts. However, this
might not be the case. Many authors expressed their dissatisfaction with
the term ‘blended learning’ and offered various explanations and concerns.
For example, Westbrook (2008) argues that the term will disappear in the
near future due to its ambiguity, multiplicity of meanings, and redundancy
(cited in Aguilar, 2012). Similarly, Oliver and Trigwell (2005) state that the
term ‘blended learning’ is ‘ill-defined’ and ‘inconsistently used’. In addition,
they see that in spite of its increasing popularity, the term is incoherent and
redundant. Moreover, its lack of clarity will jeopardize future studies and
research in this field since there is no common conception of its meaning.
Graham (2006) sounds more optimistic. He states that regardless of
what we decide to call blended learning in the future, the phenomenon of
blended learning is here to stay. Thus, it is crucial that we understand how to
create effective blended learning experiences that incorporate both F2F and
computer-mediated elements.
Benefits and Challenges:
Teachers who advocate integrating modern technologies into traditional
teaching can talk for hours about the benefits of BL for students, teachers,
and academic institutions. On the other hand, we find many educators and
learners who prefer to dig their heals in and refuse to give up the ‘good old’
ways of education.
As a matter of fact, BL has many benefits that no one can deny. One major
benefit is its flexibility and unconventionality. It offers a margin of freedom
for learners to work independently for a while away from the traditional
everyday classroom setting. Students can enjoy the luxury of working at
their own convenience anywhere they like. This is very alluring especially
for learners who come from a traditional education background. It is a way
for breaking out of the traditional ‘chalk and talk’ learning environment and
living a totally new educational experience.
Another important benefit for BL learning is that it offers the advantages
of mixing both online and traditional classroom education. The blend can
provide a well-balanced learning environment allowing the two methods
of learning to mix and make up for the shortcomings of each method.
Akkoyunlu and Soylu (2004) state that the weaknesses and strengths of online environment and the weaknesses and strengths of face-to-face education integrate in blended learning.
Similarly, O’Connor, Mortimer, and Bond (2011) share this view and
argue that ‘blended learning is thus a flexible approach to course design that
supports the blending of different times and places for learning, offering some of the conveniences of fully on-line courses without the complete loss of face to-face contact. The result is potentially a more robust educational experience than either traditional or fully on-line learning can offer’ (p. 64).
Rastegarpour (2011) also argues that ‘BL provides various benefits
over using any single learning delivery medium alone. A single delivery
mode inevitably limits the reach of a learning program or critical knowledge
transfer. Whereas, a virtual classroom is inclusive of remote learner’ (p.41).
A third benefit for BL is that it offers a variety of learning methods. It is
more likely that learners will learn better when the methods of learning are
varied and when the routine of the learning process does no longer exist. In
addition, blended learning has a lot to offer for learners with different learning styles, different needs, different levels and speed. Therefore, the blended approach might be a better learning environment for different learners.
Akkoyunlu and Soylu (2004) argue that e-learning provides an environment
where the learners can study regardless of time and place restrictions
according to their learning speed. In addition, they see that the factors such as learners’ individual differences, personal characteristics and learning styles have significant impacts on the learning environment.
Singh (2003) indicates that a single delivery mode limits the reach of
a learning program or critical knowledge transfer in some form or fashion.
Therefore, combining different delivery modes has the potential to balance
out and optimize learning.
Finally, BL proved to be very cost effective for both learners and
educational institutions. Graham (2006) argues that BL systems provide an opportunity for reaching a large, globally dispersed audience in a short period of time with consistent, semi-personal content delivery. Cost savings
are usually due to cost reductions in physical infrastructure and improved
scheduling efficiencies.
Despite the aforementioned benefits BL can provide, it is fraught with
potential pitfalls.
The number one potential mishap when thinking about blended learning
is students’ resistance to the whole idea of blending. No matter how much
enthusiasm the teacher and the course designers might have towards
the blended course, what really matters is the students’ satisfaction and
cooperation. Despite being part of the ‘net generation’, many students still
prefer to stay in their comfort zone when it comes to education. Students’
resilience and lack of interest can be very frustrating for enthusiastic teachers.
Biligin (2013) mentions that if students use an online program for the
first time, they will show a lot of discontent especially if they are not used to
it. It seems that although students today are very technology oriented in their
daily lives, they may not be as eager in their learning (cited in Hockly, 2014).
Another major challenge that might face BL education is the teachers
themselves and their reluctance to indulge in technology and integrate it in
their teaching. Many teachers especially those from older generations are
hesitant when they are asked to use technology in their classes. Some feel
threatened that their lack of technological abilities will be easily exposed
by their tech-savvy students. This gap is referred to by Prensky (2001) as
the ‘digital native and digital immigrant divide’. Preskey considers it ‘the
single biggest problem facing education today’ and he raises a very important
question ‘what should happen? Should the Digital Native students learn
the old ways, or should their Digital Immigrant educators learn the new?
Unfortunately, no matter how much the Immigrants may wish it, it is highly
unlikely the Digital Natives will go backwards’ (p.3)
Therefore, educators, supported by their organizations, should take this
issue seriously and take the initiative to change and work harder to develop
their technological skills in order to fit in the new teaching environment.
Finally, other factors might play a role in the success or failure of any
blended learning environment, such as learners’ background and readiness,
course design, instructor, access to technology and so forth.
Major points of strength:
‘ BL saves time and effort
‘ BL encourages students to be autonomous, responsible, and independent.
‘ BL is different, modern, exciting and untraditional.
‘ BL helps improve language skills through intensive online material
including exercises, quizzes and assignments.
‘ BL uses many different ways for teaching and improving language skills
and does not use the traditional methods that were used at school.
‘ BL is very beneficial and remarkably improves language skills.
‘ The BL course was very useful for students in terms of learning
vocabulary, grammar, pronunciation, and reading skills.
‘ BL helps focus on things that teachers need a lot of time to cover in class.
‘ BL is much more convenient.
‘ BL allows self-assessment and enhances students’ technology skills.
‘ Students like the BL course because it allows some kind of flexibility
and doesn’t require spending a lot of time on campus for attending f2f classes every day.
‘ The BL course helps encourage students to continue with the online part
on their own even after the semester is over.
Major points of weakness:
‘ BL is not suitable for students with very poor language level because it
is hard for them to cope with the online part and do all the assignments
on their own.
‘ Two f2f classes per week are not enough
‘ Students are not used to being independent and need the teacher to be
there all the time not only half the time.
‘ There is no strict control over the online part, so students do not feel the
urge for going online and doing what they have to do. Therefore, there is
a big chance of procrastination and cramming later on.
‘ Access to the internet is not available in all students’ homes, and not all
students have laptops or other devices that enable them to do the online
part.
‘ Studying alone is boring and not very encouraging.
‘ Some students do not have the technological and the language competency
to deal with the online component.
‘ BL causes a lot of distraction for the student.
‘ BL makes the students neglect other courses they are studying because it
needs a lot of time and effort.
‘ The BL does not allow the students to see their teachers very often.