First-year English Additional Language students’ insight and attitudes on blended learning methods in academic writing

Abstract

Teachers in the current digital era are required to integrate Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in their daily teaching and must replace their traditional methods with modern tools and facilities. This is because ICT provides a dynamic and proactive teaching and learning environment. Consequently, the current study sought to establish how English First Additional Language (EFAL) Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET) college first-year students understood face-to-face instruction and blended learning (BL) environments for academic writing. The study was qualitative in nature and a case study design was followed. Twelve purposively selected first-year students were involved in semi-structured interviews as part of data collection. In this study constructivism was used as theoretical framework with reference to BL and academic writing. The findings of the study revealed that most students were in favour of the face-to-face learning mode because of its advantages in their learning context. Those who were not in favour of BL posited that it had the potential to facilitate inequality among students as it was likely to benefit only those who could afford to buy data. The findings further revealed that participants believed that the combination of both face-to-face and online learning modes may be conducive to the context of learning academic writing. They contend that the two types of learning are inextricably linked.

Contribution: The study may contribute to knowledge on the measures that TVET institutions and other tertiary institutions can develop and implement academic writing practices and BL practices to aid the success of EFAL first-year students. The study was an attempt to provide feedback to academia on the current perspectives and experiences of first-year ESL students at TVET colleges to distinguish areas of limitations with reference to valuable teaching and learning, academic writing and BL practices that compromise quality.