The Blended Approach: Computer Assisted and Traditional Language Learning in Aviation English Training

Mr. Mick McDonnell and Mr. Finian Connolly
Edgewater College.
Drogheda, Ireland
Introduction
This paper will describe the development of a blended learning (BL) approach for aviation English
language training. We will define the blended approach and then examine in detail the component parts
namely Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) and face-to-face instruction. We will then briefly
discuss implementing the BL approach in Air Astana.
The term Blended Learning (BL) has become very familiar to English language training providers over the
last decade. BL is used to describe all manner of training situations but in general can be described as
combining “face-to-face instruction with computer-mediated instruction”(Graham 2003). This definition is
a suitable starting point for a specific outline of the blended learning approach Edgewater College is
implementing. To expand this definition it is necessary to consider some points that are specific to
providing English language training solutions for the aviation industry namely, which approach to second
language teaching to use and the ratio of face-to-face instruction to computer mediated instruction.
Firstly, in outlining an approach to second language teaching it is important to consider the constituent
parts of an “approach”. H.D Brown describes an approach to second language training as “ theoretically
well-informed positions and beliefs about the nature of language, the nature of language learning and the
applicability of both to pedagogical settings.” (Brown 200:14). A training solution without a clear position
on the nature of language, language learning and how these are incorporated in the media used is worse
than useless:“ to design a syllabus is to decide what gets taught and in what order. For this reason, the
theory of language explicitly or implicitly underlying the language teaching method will play a major role
in determining what syllabus is adopted” (Reilly 1988). Therefore, our definition will incorporate this
condition.
Secondly, it is important that we specify the relationship between the computer and face-to-face mediated
instruction in terms of a student’s exposure time to each element. In light of the serious financial costs of
having a lot of pilot downtime the obvious solution is to have a greater time emphasis on the computermediated
instruction. We have developed a blend with a 75% to 25% ratio of Computer Assisted
Language Learning (CALL) to face-to-face instruction. However, this ratio should not be arrived at for
purely financial reasons. It must be demonstrated that the rate of language acquisition will not be affected
negatively by weighting towards CALL. Now we can formulate a definition of the blended approach for
aviation English training as:
The Blended learning approach for aviation English combines computer-mediated instruction with
face-to-face instruction within a complimentary theoretical and pedagogic framework without
negatively affecting language acquisition rates.
To explore the theoretical approach of the CALL system we are using and to detail some of the failings in
the area, including our own, we will briefly outline the history of CALL from its inception in the 1960s
and attempt to sketch its relationship to the prevailing second language teaching methods from then until
now. This will provide an overview of the changing beliefs about the nature of language, language
learning and second language pedagogy. It will also demonstrate how the rush to embrace technology
without adequate theoretical and pedagogic change can lead to expensive failures.
Early examples of CALL tended to concentrate on language learning through behaviouristic stimulusresponse
approaches. This was manifested by a concentration on grammar and discrete point activities. In
the era of the audio-lingual methods’ supremacy, technology was seen as a way to take the necessary but
tedious pattern practice, drilling and so on out of the classroom. The most well known example of these
programs was PLATO- (Programmed Logic for Automatic Teaching Operations)
The synergy between the behaviouristic methodology and the capabilities of the computers of the time was
quite uncanny. The tutorial-and-test approach drill-and-kill suited the limited processing power of the
computers and the limited linguistic knowledge of the programmers. Mark Warschauer labelled this era
“Behaviouristic CALL” (Warschauer 1994 ).
The limitations of these early call systems were: (a) access limitations (b) the inability of the computing
power to allow anything but discrete point drilling type activities (c) the huge cost of using these
computers. The inability of the early computers to allow CALL to move away from audiolingualism was
perhaps its greatest limitation. Innovations and improvements in both technology and language
methodology took place throughout the 1970s. During this time great innovation in the investigation of the
nature of language, the nature of language learning and the pedagogy of second language instruction had
taken place. The behaviouristic model of language, with its emphasis on stimulus-response, had been
rejected by the cognitivists. The Chomskyan revolution was initiated in 1957 with the publication of
Chomsky's review of B.F Skinners “Verbal Behaviour” which he roundly criticised as “a superficial
account of language acquisition”. This statement was generally accepted as applying to behaviouristic
inspired second language teaching methods as noted by Ellis: “in the late 1960s and early ‘70s a growing
consensus was reached that behaviouristic theories of second language learning were inadequate” (Ellis
1994:44). They were inadequate because it was now believed that language was a combination of in-built
pre-programmed mental functions and outside stimulus. Learning was not a habit that could be drilled but
required cognitive processing and mental effort
By the time the PC had made it’s appearance in Time Magazine in 1982, second language learning theory
and pedagogy had seen a seismic shift from the days of drill and kill audiolingualism. The ‘70s had seen
various efforts to place the individual at the centre of learning. There was a greater concentration on the
language register and style and the Notional Functional syllabus was born; this innovation saw “language
and content arranged according to the meaning the learner needs to express through the language and
language functions the learner will use the language for” (Richards 2002:364). This would be the blueprint
for English for Special Purposes (ESP) for the next two decades and beyond. By the 1980s the Personal
Computer had been launched and the communicative approach to language teaching was being
formulated.
The Communicative approach emphasised providing the learners with opportunities to communicate in a
meaningful way with a concentration on both fluency and accuracy while accepting that this involves the
learner making errors. The opportunity for the inexpensive, powerful and portable PC to become a major
part of second language instruction was evident. The limitations of the large mainframe computers were
now a thing of past. Technology could interface with the new methodology in a meaningful way.
However, the new CALL products developed for the PC did not reflect the new theoretical approaches to
the nature of language learning and “by the end of the 1980s, many educators felt that CALL was still
failing to live up to its potential” (Warschauer 1996). Critics pointed out that the computer was being used
in an ad hoc and disconnected fashion and thus "finds itself making a greater contribution to marginal
rather than to central elements" (Warschauer 1996) of the language teaching process.
By the early 1990s the CD-ROM appeared to be the answer to finally establishing CALL in the
mainstream of English language learning. It could store and present a huge variety of activities with text,
audio, images, video etc. Edgewater College (EPTI) was one of the early providers of an Aviation English
CD-ROM and suffered from the failings of many other multimedia English language learning CD-based
programs of the time. The concept was innovative and the content was and still is valid. The major
problem with it was the lack of any discernable pedagogic validity, the overuse of text, the ungrading of
language, the overuse of glossed items, lack of comprehensive audio input and the overall textbook nature
of the product without language-specific exercises.
We do not believe these problems were unique to Aviation English on CD-ROM and 10 years later they
are still prevalent in many CALL products. The major publishers have concentrated on concordance and
dictionary tools which, while providing useful reference material, can in no way be considered to help
second language acquisition. An example is the huge Collins COBUILD, which seems to be a complete
retrograde step of providing huge textual information with context being minimal. The textbook nature of
many CALL programs has to be lamented. This new technology should be at the cutting edge in providing
a new paradigm for pedagogy based on the latest research on the nature of language and the nature of
language acquisition/learning but it has failed to do so.
The procedure of rebuilding and re-igniting a pioneering effort to provide the aviation industry with a
multimedia tool for Aviation English began with a process of examining the current crop of CALL
systems. The criteria established were minimal. The product had to offer a way out of the textbook
paradigm and had to have a strong theoretical position on the nature of language and the nature of
language learning. The programs available and well known did not meet these criteria except for a system
designed and marketed by DynEd International, Inc. or DynEd based in the United States. The theoretical
system they developed is called Recursive Hierarchical Recognition (RHR) developed by its’ founder,
Lance Knowles. This language learning approach resonates with how the human brain has evolved to
search for, recognize and employ language patterns in predictable ways. Learning proceeds in a recursive
fashion, employing the brain's hierarchical memory structure in ways that a linear approach cannot (Harris
2006 citing Knowles 2004).
The theoretical underpinnings of the approach are outlined in two papers written by Knowles and
referenced here. Essentially the theory calls for a replication of natural L1 acquisition with an emphasis on
auditory input in conjunction with other processes such as the visual, the conceptual etc. According to
Knowles “The activation of multiple processors at the same time, for example, increases the probability
that neurons will wire together to form the neural structures and neural pathways necessary to lead from
comprehension, to automaticity, and to long-term learning. “ (Knowles 2004) This grounding of the input
in a theory is allied to strongly held beliefs about the nature of effective learning. The system emphasises
frequent practice, controlled placement in relation to language input and stresses well designed appropriate
input.
This system is, we believe, the best one available and the most appropriate one for Edgewater College’s
ongoing efforts to provide the aviation industry with the most effective language learning tools available.
The framework provided by recursive hierarchical learning was incorporated by Edgewater College in
developing a call program specific to aviation English in conjunction with DynEd and other partners. This
collaborative effort has resulted in the creation of Aviation English for Pilots. The aviation specific
product is a supplementary course to be used in conjunction with other DynEd CALL courses such a New
Dynamic English, English for Success, English by the Numbers and many others.
It is undeniable that language acquisition requires the interaction of learners with other learners,
instructors, native speakers etc. I believe the CALL approach we outlined above has a greater emphasis on
learner interaction than other CALL systems. However, a social forum for the personalisation and
extension of language is necessary for effective learning. This extension comes in the form of face-to-face
interaction within a classroom setting. This is where the traditional pedagogical setting has to reflect the
theoretical position taken in relation to the nature of language and language learning. To illustrate how
CALL and classroom learning can be blended in an authentic context we will outline a blended Aviation
English learning program designed for Air Astana in Kazakhstan. The classroom interaction is based on
the scope and sequence of the language within the CALL courses. The initial program is for those students
we have identified at ICAO level 1 and is designed to progress them to ICAO level 2.
The creation of a classroom program for aviation English requires a number of preliminary steps to be
taken. We will illustrate the process with reference to the implementation of the face-face section of the
blended approach for Air Astana. We will address:
(a) The needs analysis
(b) Situation analysis
(c) Planning goals and learning outcomes
(d) Course planning and syllabus design
Needs Analysis
The needs analysis process when providing English language training to airlines is heavily guided by
ICAO’s “Manual on the Implementation of ICAO Language Proficiency Requirements.” The nature of
the language skills and the level relating to those skills is set out clearly in this document. The group was
mono-linguistic, the daily use of English was known due to the routes of aircraft being specific, the
attitude of management to language learning was positive. What was required was an assessment of
language ability, an assessment of attitudes to the use of English and the reaction to the possibility of
mandatory language tuition. We also needed to know the availability of computers to the pilots plus what
existing processes were in place relating to English language training.
To assess the students’ level of English a computer adaptive placement test1 was used. This test took
place in a computer lab, with flight operations scheduling pilots in groups of 10 to take the test. This
process lasted a number of weeks. The test was correlated with a sample, taking a stretch pen and paper
grammar test2, (which, according to O’Sullivan (2006), is probably still the best indicator of language
level, but lacks communicative pedigree). These results were then correlated to the ICAO language levels.
To assess the attitudes to the use of English and the possibility of mandatory language tuition meetings
were held with chief pilots. We discovered that they were enthusiastic about the process and eager to get
it started straight away. The aviation industry seems at ease with assessments and training. The fact that
regular line checks, medicals etc. are part of normal working conditions seems to eliminate hostility to
testing. Previous language courses had taken place but little information was available. No outline of a
syllabus was available nor lesson plans or schemes of work etc. A discussion with the A320 chief pilot
did establish that they were assessed orally in a one-to-one conversation with a teacher but no written
results were provided. Essentially nothing substantial can be said about the previous training except the
record keeping was not very good. Flight operations carried out a survey of what computers pilots owned
and it was shown that 80% had laptops that met the basic criteria.
1 Computer adaptive testing is a method for administering tests that adapts to the examinee's ability level. For this
reason, it has also been called tailored testing (Rudner 98) For a great introduction to adaptive testing see Lawrence M.
Rudner An On-line, Interactive, Computer Adaptive Testing Tutorial, 11/98 (http://EdRes.org/scripts/cat)
2 Standard 200-item grammar and listening multiple choice placement test. For a similar example see Dave Allen’s
Oxford Placement Test.
Situation analysis
The situation analysis again, is basically covered in the ICAO document “ Manual on the implementation
of ICAO Language Proficiency Requirements.” The main area of concern here is what will happen to
people who do not reach Operational Level 4 and what assessment is used to decide this. Obviously,
without further clarification from ICAO we cannot pursue this issue. This is an area that perhaps this
conference can shed some light on. In the Kazakh program the pedagogical history of the students was a
factor. Strother et al outlined this clearly in their paper “Acculturated Blended Learning: Localizing a
Blended Learning course for Russian trainees”. The issues explored there are applicable to the Kazak
learners. One of the points they addressed was the sciento-technical pedagogical tradition, which is
evidenced by a teacher-centered approach. The possibility of a negative reaction to a learner-centered
approach was addressed by consultation with the chief pilots and management. It is hoped that a trickle
down effect regarding the pedagogical nature of the course will go some way towards reducing negative
initial reaction. It was also decided to provide a textbook for the students. This was done to provide a
concrete relationship to the pedagogical paradigm that they were familiar with. The text chosen was the
original version of the “English File” series. These are non-linear topic based textbooks that correlate in
scope and sequence quite well with the CALL courses. The textbook provides class instructors with
ready-made tools for language extension that do not contradict the principles outlined above.
Planning goals and learning outcomes
The structure of the course provides inbuilt goals. A period of time is set as the basic time scale for
advancement from one ICAO level to another e.g. for someone to advance from level 1 to level 2 a threemonth
period is set. Within this timeframe a series of smaller fortnightly goals are set both for the CALL
program and the classroom interaction. The progress of the candidates on the CALL program is measured
by their “study score” which takes into account such things as: use of speech recognition, playback of
student voice, the use of text, comprehension scores, mastery test scores, completion time etc. The
classroom component is assessed with objective scores for attendance, time keeping, work completion rate
etc. in conjunction with a teacher assessment. Together the two assessments provide clear and measurable
progress stages. Failure to meet the progress stages results in early intervention and possible solutions are:
extra tuition, one-to-one classes and so on, thereby avoiding attention drift that is so common in elearning.
Course planning and syllabus design
Course planning and syllabus design are areas dictated by the theoretical underpinnings of the CALL
program along with this other factor that apply to computer-mediated instruction in general such as low
boredom thresholds and high dropout rates.
A lack of interaction with native speakers and lack of monitoring within the CALL system are major
difficulties that lead to general dissatisfaction. E-learning dropout rates are substantial.
In one study published by Learning Tree, a national IT training provider that conducted its own e-learning
trial, a mere 30% of the participants completed the program (Van Liew 2007). This figure is transferable
across the whole sector and is caused by the very nature of poor language technology which is manifested
in (a) a pedagogy free system (b) separation of learners from human tutors (c) lack of interactivity (d)
necessity of constant access to the internet (e) the isolation of the learner.
The Blended approach we champion deals with these issues in the following way:
(a) The pedagogic underpinnings of the CALL system outlined above place it outside a pedagogic
neutral framework.
(b) The DynEd CALL system does not require Internet access all the time and is not an e-learning
system. On-line access is only required to upload your records at an interval decided by the project
manager.
(c) The records management system supplied by DynEd provides both the learner and the
administrators with instant, comprehensive feedback on individual use.
(d) The course material is presented in a non-linear fashion and repetition of activities and direct
language repetition is avoided through the use of complementary activities. The availability of
various courses with the same language focus but various conceptual foci is another factor in the
avoidance of learner boredom.
(e) The interaction with the tutor, to extend and personalize the language covered in the CALL
system is designed to be frequent. This avoids a failing of e-learning which according to Rehak is
“essentially about a single-learner [whose learning is] self-paced and self-directed.” (Friesen
2003).
The general English focus is on extending the language explored by the learner through CALL. This
extension and personalization of the language takes place within a multi-faceted pedagogic approach that
can be described as “Principled Eclecticism.” The general English classes have been designed to give
experienced EFL teachers a degree of autonomy over the methodology used. However, the scope and
sequence of the language are set by that of the CALL programme and no substantial deviation from these
is acceptable. Although, it is not usual for ESP to be taught at such low levels we felt that to further
motivate the learners and to keep them focused on their goal and lastly to further personalize the language
it would be beneficial to include aviation-specific English. To give face validity to the aviation-specific
language classes we decided that they would be delivered by former pilots These lessons give the students
time to practice aviation English while interacting with a Subject Matter Expert (SME).
To avoid a lack of real world tasks that “require learners to approximate, in class, the sorts of behaviors
required of them in the world beyond the classroom” (Nunan 1989:40) the use of subject matter experts
(SMEs) is required. The use of pilots as instructors is an area where careful consideration had to be given.
The basic framework for the use of SMEs was twofold (a) to help in the design of language lessons with
an authentic aviation context and (b) to provide an interface for the learners with their native speaking
peers. The SMEs’ interaction with the learners is carefully spaced. After an initial introduction before the
course commences the SMEs classes are timetabled at intervals of 4 weeks. We believe that spacing
aviation specific content classes increases motivation to perform well on the general English classes,
which precede and follow them. Secondly, the SMEs’ lessons have been designed to provide a
communicative framework for the instruction of standard phraseology. We believe strongly that standard
phraseology has to be imparted to the students by those who have used it in a real world setting. The
SMEs’ classes were developed by pilots and English language professionals and provide further extension
of the general English as well as a heavy emphasis on aviation-specific English, for example in one lesson
learners are required to note down information from a ATIS and reformulate this information to make a
PA announcement to passengers using the language they have already acquired in their general English
lessons (both CALL and face-to-face).
The blended approach we have described above has been in place for a number of months. Early results
indicate that it has been adopted well by the stakeholders. It is too early to say definitively how successful
the program will be but we believe that it is the only logical approach to take. Also, the confidential and
commercially sensitive nature of the information we hold prevents a fuller exploration of concrete data
such as initial test scores, timescale predictions for achievement of level 4 and so on. It would be a great
pleasure to present some concrete results at a further date with the permission of Air Astana.
Bibliography
Brown J.D. (1995) The Elements of Language Cirriculum: A Systematic Approach to Program
Development Heinle & Heinle.
Brown, H.D. (2001) Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy Longman.
Canale, M. From communicative competence to communicative language
pedagogy in J. C. Richards and R. W. Schmidt (Eds.) (1983) Language and
communication (pp. 2 - 27) Longman
Chao B., & Leng G. (2006) eLearners, A Special Breed of Learners with Implicit Learning Characteristics
Information Communication Institute of Singapore.
http://www.searcc07.com/eLAP2006/Proceeding/p17.1-6-fin-34.pdf (accessed November 2006)
Chomsky, N. A Review of B. F. Skinner's Verbal Behavior in Leon A. Jakobovits and Murray S. Miron
(Eds.) (1967) Readings in the Psychology of Language (pp. 142-143) Prentice-Hall
Egbert, J.L., & Petrie, G.N. (Eds.) (2005) CALL Research Perspectives Lawrence Erlbaum
Ellis, R. (1994) The Study of Second Language Acquisition Oxford University Press
Friesen, N. Three Objections to Learning Objects and E-learning Standards in McGreal, R. (Ed.) (2004)
Online Education Using Learning Objects (pp. 59-70) Routledge
Graham, C.R. (2007) Blended Learning Systems: Definition, Current Trends and Future Directions
Brigham Young University, USA
http://www.uab.edu/it/instructional/technology/docs/blended_learning_systems.pdf. (Accessed January
2007)
Heinze, A. and Procter, C. (2006) Informatics Communication - a Challenge and an Enabler for
Facilitating Blended Learning Community Informatics Research Institute, University of Salford
http://orgs.man.ac.uk/projects/include/experiment/heinze_proctor.pdf (Accessed February 2007)
Hutchison M. & Young, C. (1963) Educating the Intelligent Penguin books.
ICAO (2004) Manual on the Implementation of ICAO Language Proficiency Requirements ICAO
Knowles L. (2004) On the Cusp: New Developments in Language Teaching ESL Magazine Issue 40,
July/August 2004
Knowles L. (2004) The Evolution of CALL Language Magazine August 2004
Knowles L. (2003) Web site information http://www.dyned.com/products/coursefeatures.shtml
Meskill, C. and Rangelova, K. (2000) Relocating the ‘cognitive’ in sociocognitive views of second
language learning in R. Rapp (Ed) Linguistics on the Way into the New Millennium: Proceedings of the
34th Colloquium of Linguistics Peter Lang-Verlag Publishing
Nunan, D. (1989) Designing tasks for the communicative classroom
Cambridge University Press.
O’Sullivan, B. (2007) Association of European Language Testers (AELT) workshop Perugia, Italy.
Reilly, T. (1988) Approaches to Foreign Language Syllabus Design ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages
and Linguistics
http://www.ericdigests.org/pre-928/design.htm (Accessed June 2006)
Richards, J.C. (2001) Curriculum Development in Language Teaching Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J.C. & Smith R. (2002) Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics Longman.
Strother, J.B., Fazal, Z. and Gurevich, M. (2007) Acculturated Blended Learning: Localizing A Blended
Learning Course for Russian Trainees Proceeding 557, Web Based Education Journal
Van Liew, R. (2005) Effective corporate IT training: Bursting the e-learning bubble Hands On
Technology Transfer, Inc. http://www.itworld.com/Career/3710/050603elearning/index.html. (Accessed
January 2007)
Warschauer, M. (1999) Millennialism and Media: Language, Literacy, and Technology in the 21st Century
Keynote address delivered at the World Congress of Applied Linguistics (AILA) Tokyo, August 1999.
Warschauer, M. (1996) Computer-assisted language learning: an introduction in S. Fotos (Ed.), (pp.3-20)
Tokyo: Logos International
Warschauer, M. (1997) Computer-mediated collaborative learning: Theory and practice Modern
Language Journal. 81, 470-481.
Yalden, Janice (1987) The Communicative Syllabus: Evolution, Design and Implementation Prentice-Hall.
— — — — — — — —