Bringing Language Learning

Online and in Blended

Paradigms

Rebecca Rhea

Three parts to our discussion…

How blended learning can support immersive language learning environments

How Common Core Standards align with ACTFL National

Standards in L2 courses

Discovering success factors

The Implementation Context

Implementation

Model

Fully Online

Blended

Supplemental

Mixed

Teaching Model

We Teach

They Teach

Grade Level

Elementary

Middle

High

Mix

Tech Access

High

Mid

Low

“Most of the growth is occurring in blended-learning environments, in which students learn online in an adult-supervised environment at least part of the time.”

http://goodwin.cmswiki.wikispaces.net/file/vie

w/The-Rise-of-K-12-Blended-Learning.pdf

Rise of Blended Learning

7

Blended Learning: Market Data

Source: Education Sector Factbook, GSV Advisors, 2012

Middlebury Interactive SY13-14 Enrollments (July 1-Aug. 31)

1%

20%

78%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

K-5 6-8 9-12

Perc

ent

of

Sch

oo

ls A

do

pti

ng

Adoption of Blended Learning in Schools (2008)

45,701

11,471

-

20

40

60

Fully Online Proxy(PGLMS)

Blended Proxy(CAP, BH, BB)

Enro

llmen

ts (

in T

ho

usa

nd

s)

• Middlebury Interactive blended enrollments are approximately 20% of total enrollments (proxy) • Approximately two-thirds of districts offer some online or blended program

• Large majority of programs have relatively few students and rely on external course providers

From Innosight Institute: Classifying k-12 Blended Learning 2012 Heather Stacker and Michael Horn

Developing a new

ATTITUDE towards new

languages and cultures

Gaining new language and

cultural KNOWLEDGE

Acquiring new

language and cultural

SKILLS

An experiential approach that goes beyond language proficiency to impact the whole individual.

The ASK Model

Research in SLA - What works?

OPTIMAL L2 LEARNING

(Ortega, 2009)

1.

Acculturated attitudes

(Schumann, 1990, 1997)

2.

Comprehensible input

(Krashen, 1985, 2004)

3.

Negotiated interaction

(long, 1996) 4.

Pushed output

(Swain, 1985)

5.

Noticing/Attention

(Schmidt, 1995)

Acquisition

Middlebury Courses

HS French I

HS Spanish II

HS Spanish I

HS Spanish I

HS Spanish I

HS Spanish I

HS Chinese I

HS French I

HS French I

HS French I

HS French I

How Common Core

Standards align with

ACTFL National

Standards in L2 courses

ACTFL, 2012

(http://www.actfl.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/CrosswalkFinalAligningCCSSLanguageStandards.pdf)

Three parts to our discussion…

Third Party Evaluation:

The 2012-13 Johns

Hopkins University Study

Middlebury Interactive: Research

and Evaluation Paradigm

Research-based Product Design Product Testing

Continuous Customer

Feedback and Product/Program

Monitoring

Third Party Evaluation

Why 3rd Party

Evaluation?

An unbiased study definition and execution

Design and results that are analyzed and published by an independent, respected research entity

Confirmation of the organization’s commitment to ensure rigorous, ongoing evaluation of product and implementation against established metrics

3rd Party Evaluation Presents:

Center for Research and Reform in

Education (CRRE), John Hopkins U

• Mixed Methods Design

• Establishing the Research Questions:

1. To what degree do teachers/ schools define Middlebury Interactive

program to be effective in supporting the World Language proficiency-

based instruction model?

2. What are students’ reactions to the Middlebury Interactive program with

regard to interest, learning experiences, instructional materials and

activities, and effectiveness for learning?

3. What is the overall student success in world languages with use of the

Middlebury course design ?

– Cultural awareness and appreciation

– Language proficiency

– Motivating experience to continue world language

The Research Design

Phase I

• Preliminary Lab School Site Observation

• Teacher, student and administrator interviews and observations

Phase II

• Survey Development

• Interviews with teachers and program administrators Likert-type rating design and open-ended questions

• Online Survey Monkey distribution – 170 anonymous respondents representing teachers, program administrators and lab monitors

Phase III

• Case Study Follow-up and Data Collection

• Additional interviews and observations

• Data from STAMP assessment administration

• Teacher gradebook data and online course gradebook data

• Locally operated career and

technology center serving

three high schools in the

district.

• Language taught: Spanish

• Students from all grade levels

– 9 through 12.

• A few students had limited

exposure to Spanish at their

middle school through an

exploratory language class.

Majority of the students had

no prior language learning.

Case Study Context and Population

Case Study Challenges

• An evolving course implementation: Teacher started with a fully online course implementation which was refined to a hybrid implementation.

• Scheduling: The class was designed to be a condensed full-year program, delivered within a semester time period with a 2-hour block scheduling approach.

• Access: The lead teacher initially planned to do a flipped-classroom with students using the online courses at home but discovered limited access to technology for home use.

• Student Expectations: Students,

in most cases, were not aware that

that would be using an online course

prior to starting the course, especially

during the first semester.

The Strengths of Jessamine

• Technology proficient teachers.

• 2 semester study with first semester as a trial and a blended learning development.

• Strong administrative support. Administration understood that digital learning adds to the experience and deepens learning.

• Access to technology on the school site.

• Technology support on site to limit interruptions to instructional time.

Results

The Case Study Results

“In terms of the STAMP Assessment, it is interesting to note that the scores for the second semester students are significantly higher than both the first semester scores as well as higher than the non-MIL class where Spanish I/ II was taught using a non-specific curriculum with teacher-gathered materials over the entire school year. This year an average STAMP score of 2 was considered passing and this was easily surpassed by most.”

Teacher Grade

MIL Online Course Grade

Reading Writing Listening Speaking

Teacher I, Semester I 84.2 80.2 2.93 2.46 1.97 2.30

Teacher 1, Semester 2 88.6 86.6 3.56 2.96 2.36 2.71

Teacher 2, Semester 2 76.1 73.7 3.31 2.86 2.18 2.55

Non-MIL, Yearlong Course

NA NA 3.04 2.44 2.08 2.48

The Research Questions

• “Both the teachers from the Lab School and the online survey

respondents using Middlebury Interactive courses were enthusiastic and

confident about the program’s ability to effectively support world

language proficiency-based instruction.”

• “The overall sentiment among those surveyed and interviewed is that

Middlebury Interactive offers unique and robust courses that effectively

build language proficiency and enhance cultural appreciation.”

Question 1: To what degree do teachers/ schools define Middlebury Interactive program to be effective in supporting the World Language proficiency-based instruction model both in terms of integration into teaching context and support of world language objectives of the course?

The Research Questions

• “When asked, ‘what part of MIL do you like the most and why?’ the majority of

students indicated appreciating the differentiated learning opportunities inherent

in Middlebury Interactive courses. The sense of freedom that comes with being

able to determine one’s own pace was new and enjoyed by many. Another

feature that was highlighted by a number of students was the authentic videos.”

• “Initial interest in the language was low but many students admitted to feeling

“more into it” as the course went on. Aside from their increased interest in

learning the language, their interest in Hispanic culture was certainly

peaked.”

Question 2: What are students’ reactions to the Middlebury Interactive program with regard to interest, learning experiences, instructional materials and activities, and effectiveness for learning?

The Research Questions

• “Many of the highest ratings from the survey surrounded MIL’s ability to enhance

levels of appreciation of different cultures and encourage a positive

attitude toward target language cultures and those speaking the target

language. Respondents also indicated students showing appropriate levels of

mastery within both the Competency and Fluency courses and advancing along

to language proficiency at an appropriate pace.”

• “... it appears that developing cultural knowledge represents one of the

greatest relative strengths of the MIL Fluency I course.”

Question 3: What is the overall student success in world languages with use of the Middlebury course design in terms of cultural awareness and appreciation, language proficiency, and motivating experience to continue world language?

Unanticipated Positive Outcomes

• Shift of expectations: improved integration of technology in the learning process

of the students

• Deeper learning; deeper understanding of technology to support student’s

learning path

• Growth of teachers as Research practitioner (Reflexive Practitioner)

• Growth of teachers as Mentors and Coaches for other teachers

• Students and teachers feel empowered because they

were heard in their feedback and MIL integrated the

feedback in the revision of the courses

• Immediate progress and accuracy in student pronunciation.

Q&A

What does the difference between

mixture and solution have to do with

blended learning?

Thank you!

Becky Rhea rrhea@middleburyinteractive.com