1. Introduction
The nature and scope of research into distance language learning (DLL) has opened up quite markedly since the publication of my state-of-the-art article (White Reference White2006), with expanding research trajectories in multimodality, learner contributions and teacher training, and the development of further theoretical and pedagogical frameworks. The field has seen the development of empirically-based models for the evaluation of both distance language programs (Madyarov Reference Madyarov2009) and of synchronous learning management systems (Wang & Chen Reference Wang and Chen2009); new theoretical models of DLL have also been developed (Andrade & Bunker Reference Andrade and Bunker2009; Bertin, Grave & Narcy-Combes Reference Bertin, Grave and Narcy-Combes2010; Lamy Reference Lamy, Thomas, Reinders and Warschauer2013), as have frameworks for teaching skills required in synchronous online environments (Guichon Reference Guichon2009) and for the design of online assessment (Wang & Chen Reference Wang, Chen, Xing, Xiang, Wang and Sun2013). Importantly, too, critical overviews of empirical research (Blake Reference Blake2007, Reference Blake2009, Reference Blake2011, Reference Blake2013; Vorobel & Kim Reference Vorobel and Kim2012; Lamy Reference Lamy, Thomas, Reinders and Warschauer2013) have been proposed, together with the incorporation of distance learning as a theme in broader review articles on CALL and language for specific purposes (Lafford Reference Lafford2009; Levy Reference Levy2009; Arnó-Macià Reference Arnó-Macià2012; Grgurović, Chapelle & Shelley Reference Grgurović, Chapelle and Shelley2013). This article proposes a research agenda that will guide scholarship to address emerging issues and to contribute a stronger evidence base for theory building and practice. To do this I work broadly within the framework of the 2006 overview article, which continues to offer a helpful way of framing the field, thus allowing the reader to compare the shifts and developments in those substantive areas. However, given the increasing range of research trajectories in DLL there remain a number of areas that are not addressed directly in the scope of this agenda: these include the distance learning of Chinese (Tasker Reference Tasker, Everson and Shen2010; Alvarez & Qian Reference Álvarez, Qian, Jin and Cortazzi2013; Stickler & Shi Reference Stickler and Shi2013; Qian & McCormick Reference Qian and McCormick2014), the development of intercultural competence (Alvarez & Qian Reference Álvarez, Qian, Jin and Cortazzi2013), telecollaborative distance language projects (Hauck & Youngs Reference Hauck and Youngs2008; Stickler & Emke Reference Stickler and Emke2011; vom Brocke et al. Reference vom Brocke, White, Walker, Vom Brocke, Ulf-Daniel and Schneckenberg2010) and mobile language learning (Kukulska-Hulme & Shield Reference Kukulska-Hulme and Shield2008; Comas-Quinn, Mardomingo & Valentino Reference Comas-Quinn, Mardomingo and Valentine2009; Demouy & Kukulska-Hulme Reference Demouy and Kukulska-Hulme2010; Kukulska-Hulme Reference Kukulska-Hulme2010; Pegrum (Reference Pegrum2014)). I begin with the developing knowledge base into paradigms and theories of DLL.
2. Paradigms and theoretical perspectives
An important challenge for research into DLL identified by White (Reference White2006) has been to develop ‘an adequate conceptual basis for the field based on a synthesis of perspectives – including those of teachers, researchers and learners’ (p. 248), spanning the continuum from traditional to cutting-edge practices. Conceptual issues are at the core of a recent critical examination by Lamy (Reference Lamy, Thomas, Reinders and Warschauer2013) of distance CALL (DCALL) online and of the distinction between the fields of activity in CALL and DCALL. This timely chapter argues that while the two fields may intersect at various points, there has been an ‘under-articulation by DCALL researchers and practitioners of the unique features of their work’ (p. 141) which, in the longer term, has resulted in misconceptions about the field of DLL and distance language teaching (DLT). In defining a disciplinary identity for DCALL, Lamy draws on Glikman's (2002) perspective that DLL has as a distinguishing criterion non-co-presence: ‘the bulk . . . of learning, is undertaken outside of a direct, face-to face relationship between co-present teachers and learners’ (p. 19). This can be seen as aligned with Blake's (Reference Blake2009) observation that ‘much learning still occurs when individuals are alone, working by themselves in isolation at odd times and places, which is the bedrock of the DL curriculum’ (p. 829), and White's argument that a key defining feature of DLL is the absence of direct and ongoing mediation of learning experiences by a teacher (White Reference White1999, Reference White2003, Reference White2006). Lamy goes on to argue that ‘DCALL overlaps but is not co-terminous with CALL and instead has specific concerns related to distance, openness, flexibility and support for learners’ (p. 155). The question then arises: what is the distinctive nature of those features and practices in the context of DLL? Hence, the initial item on a future research agenda is:
Research task 1: Conduct a study of a distance language programme to identify the specific features and practices of distance, openness, flexibility and learner support, comparing teacher and learner experiences of those features and practices
To undertake this research task, initial conceptual work is required, focusing on the constructs of distance, openness, flexibility and learner support in the DLT research literature, as background to Lamy's discussion of the constructs. A distance language programme can then be selected and analysed based on the following: pre-determined course content and content generated by course participants; questionnaires and follow-up interviews with course designers, teachers and support staff regarding the specific features of the language programme; observation of course interactions (teacher–student, student–student and forms of learner support) and assessments at different points in the course. These initial phases of the study can be followed by a comparative phase involving more detailed interviews about identified features and practices, first with teachers, then with learners. In writing up, the research attention should be on defining the four constructs, and relating them to both the features and practices of the programme, with ongoing comparison of related teacher and learner perspectives and experiences.
The second item in this section centres on the notion of the learner–context interface and arises from the application of White's learner-based theory of DLL (White Reference White1999, Reference White2003, Reference White, Holmberg, Shelley and White2005) to a critical examination of the research and evaluation studies carried out at the Open University UK over the last two decades. Hampel & de los Arcos (Reference Hampel and de los Arcos2013) present a longitudinal perspective on the development of DLL opportunities using the concept of the learner–context interface: the interface developed in the processes of DLL between individual learner contributions and the features of the learning context. Key domains of research activity for the learner dimension were found to focus on interaction, learning communities, metacognition, literacy, affect and learner support; studies relating to the context dimension explored task design, teacher roles, teacher skills, functionalities of the environment (as in multimodality) and the setting (as in telecollaboration). Importantly, the study identifies how a theoretically informed critical review of research, carried out within a single institution over time, can frame quite diverse studies, identifying important gaps in research specific to those DLL settings and in the wider literature. A critical component of the future agenda identified by Hampel & de los Arcos concerns the need for further investigation of the learner dimensions and, in particular, what learners bring to the process in terms of their individual attributes. Hence:
Research task 2: Conduct a study to investigate individual learner contributions to distance language learning
Learner contributions are diverse and complex, so the initial framing of this study is important: motivation remains a critical but under-researched dimension (White Reference White2006), and would be an important area of enquiry, particularly bearing in mind Dörnyei's (Reference Dörnyei2009) argument that motivation can usefully be seen in constellation with cognition and affect. I would also suggest drawing on Ushioda's (Reference Ushioda, Dörnyei and Ushioda2009) person-in-context relational view of emergent motivation which is congruent with the learner–context interface theory: such an approach aims to capture the dynamic, complex and mutually constitutive relationship between individuals and contexts. This emically-based qualitative study of emergent motivation in DLL could include thick descriptions of the settings of the study, and of the learners’ actions to construct an effective interface with those settings, and their attendant motivational states; think-aloud protocols as used by Hurd (Reference Hurd2007b) to investigate affect in relation to specific tasks would be an appropriate data-collection tool. If appropriate, the study could also include analysis of participants’ discourse in online communication settings, supplemented by individual retrospective interviews to validate interpretation (see Coughlan & Duff Reference Coughlan, Duff, Lantolf and Appel1994 for the significance of this stage). Research in DLL to date has lacked such a fine-grained following of learners as individual agents and their interplay with the learning environment, and this study would be a valuable addition to our understanding of the ongoing development of the learner–context interface.
3. Pedagogical perspectives
A prevalent focus of early research in DLT was course design and development, including stages, processes, and logistical and institutional factors, as well as course evaluation. While ongoing research has led to a framework for the evaluation of distance language courses (Madyarov Reference Madyarov2009), the focus of research activity has by and large shifted from course design to task design, and in particular to task design for a range of online tools and learning events (e.g. Rosell-Aguilar Reference Rosell-Aguilar2005; Hauck & Youngs Reference Hauck and Youngs2008; Berglund Reference Berglund2009). Correspondingly, interest in teaching roles, tutor skills and ongoing professional development is increasingly tied to particular task types within online learning events.
To begin this section on pedagogical perspectives I want to draw on Blake's (Reference Blake2009) critical overview of technology in L2 distance learning. In that article Blake presents a compelling case as he argues for future research to play a role ‘in documenting the dynamics of language learning in a distance language context’ (p. 832), elaborating that although there has been a prevailing concern with products and outcomes in DLL, many aspects of the processes of DLL and DLT, and the opportunities they present, have not as yet been identified. Blake's call is made in the context of technology-mediated learning opportunities, and aligns with findings from a study by Murphy, Shelley & Baumann (Reference Murphy, Shelley and Baumann2010). That study, into student perceptions of effective tutoring in distance language learning, is one part of a multi-phase study into the attributes, skills and expertise which are required in DLT (Murphy et al. Reference Murphy, Shelley, White and Baumann2006; Shelley et al. Reference Shelley, White, Baumann and Murphy2006; Baumann, Shelley & Murphy Reference Baumann, Shelley and Murphy2009). The findings underline the importance of affective and organisational dimensions of engagement across all aspects of the role: for example, students argued that – for them – points of contact with tutors were generally high-stakes, and that DLT thus requires more attention to interpersonal aspects and relationships, better organisation and focus than is often required in other settings, and a degree of sensitivity and empathy towards the learner's individual context. While much research has focused on understanding distance teacher skills in different virtual settings and in relation to specific task types (e.g. Comas-Quinn, de los Arcos & Mardomingo Reference Comas-Quinn, de los Arcos and Mardomingo2012; Ernest, Heiser & Murphy Reference Ernest, Heiser and Murphy2013), no research to date has addressed the skills required at diverse points in a distance language course: critical points would include orienting students to the DLL context, preparing for assessed work and addressing motivational slumps. The kind of longitudinal study called for by Murphy and her colleagues would provide a broad perspective from which to view the practices of DLT and would address Blake's concern to make clear the dynamics of DLT. Hence the following research task:
Research task 3: Conduct a longitudinal study of the skills required and best practices of distance language teachers at different points of a language course; include a parallel phase enquiring into student perceptions of what they value and require as language learners at those same points
The selection of data-collection points is critical in a study such as this, bearing in mind the nature of the course at particular points (e.g. curriculum, task and assessment requirements), and care needs to be taken not to over-burden participants: two data collection points with follow-up retrospective interviews once the course is concluded may be more appropriate for shorter courses. Data can be collected using combinations of questionnaires, semi-structured interviews and narrative frames (see Shelley, Murphy & White Reference Shelley, Murphy and White2013 for details of narrative frames and interviews).
Within the many arenas of DLT, a rich seam of studies has emerged over the past decade in the development of oral/aural communicative skills and interactive competence online. Central to this research is the awareness that designing for oral participation in online settings implies at least three interrelated questions: understanding and engaging with the affordances of the particular online setting, task design, and tutor roles and expertise. Studies of task design and task enactment, beginning with Hampel (Reference Hampel2006), highlight the critical role of the tutor in task implementation phases in online synchronous settings. While this is not surprising, some of the issues arising from that research reveal new research problems. Hampel (Reference Hampel2009), for example, identifies a key challenge in online distance synchronous settings as the tendency for tutors to assume a more directive or teaching-centred approach than is congruent with the acknowledged benefits of learner-centred language teaching. It is evident that certain features of the setting may lead to this approach, including student unfamiliarity with the online tools, technical problems and the perceived need to direct students to the affordances of the environment. Importantly, too, Hampel notes that students often find it very difficult to collaborate, having been mostly used to the self-study aspects of DLL. Beyond these epistemological shifts in practices of DLL and DLT, Hampel identifies the critical importance of design in fostering interaction and collaboration online, referring to Mangenot & Nissen's (Reference Mangenot and Nissen2006) framework: ‘A more learner-centred approach requires the ability on the part of the teacher to provide a setting in which learners can develop the socioaffective, sociocognitive and organisational skills that are prerequisites of collaboration. This can be facilitated by appropriate tasks, moderation and feedback’ (p. 47). In addressing this challenge, the research agenda developed by Hopkins et al. (Reference Hopkins, Gibson, Ros i Solé, Savvides and Starkey2008) for asynchronous computer-mediated communication (CMC) is helpful. Citing a study by Gilbert & Dabbagh (Reference Gilbert and Dabbagh2005) in which the evolution of a course is followed over four terms, they argue for the value of longitudinal research, comparing different cohorts of students undertaking evolving versions of a course. Such an approach extends the research focus beyond a single context, so that the value and efficacy of particular practices can be judged across time and across settings, and can be usefully applied to other DLT contexts. Hence, a significant item for the future research agenda is the following:
Research task 4: Using a multiple case study design, investigate tutor processes of task design, moderation and feedback in a distance language learning synchronous setting, over three semesters. Investigate learner development of socioaffective, sociocognitive and organisational skills within and across the case studies
A notable development in the literature over the past decade is the range of research conducted into the practices of DLL and DLT in China (Hurd & Xiao Reference Hurd and Xiao2006; Xiao Reference Xiao2008; Zhang & Cui Reference Zhang and Cui2010; Xiao & Zhao Reference Xiao and Zhao2011; Xiao Reference Xiao2012a, Reference Xiaob). One such study, Xiao & Zhao (Reference Xiao and Zhao2011), carried out in China's radio and television universities, enquires into English language teaching tutors’ professional development needs, focusing on self-concept, current forms of professional development, and expectations of institutional support for professional development. Concerning institutional support, Xiao & Zhao identify mentoring as potentially important in scaffolding the development of new tutors. While several studies have underlined the potential of mentoring (Hampel & Stickler Reference Hampel and Stickler2005; Lamy & Hampel Reference Lamy and Hampel2007; Stickler & Hampel Reference Stickler and Hampel2007; Hampel Reference Hampel2009), we have as yet a very limited evidence base from which to understand mentoring in DLT. In the wider CALL literature the classic study of mentoring is Meskill et al. (Reference Meskill, Anthony, Hilliker-VanStrander, Tseng and You2006), describing a technology-assisted language learning course in which both doctoral students and practising teachers mentored pre-service teacher candidates. Of note is the way in which the knowledge and skills brought by the three sets of participants is detailed. Given the often distributed nature of expertise in DLT (e.g. course designers, tutors, researchers and learner support staff), elements of Meskill et al.'s study could be adapted to distance language contexts. This could be extended to include case studies and narrative writing to enquire further into mentoring practices and impacts as in Orland-Barak (Reference Orland-Barak2002), in carrying out the following research task:
Research task 5: Conduct a study of mentoring practices in distance language teaching and their impacts on participants
4. Technology use
The tools available to support virtual communication and interaction have increased in number and complexity over the past decade, as has our understanding of the specific contribution they can make in DLL and DLT processes. For example, it is now abundantly clear that multimodal tools do not mirror or replicate face-to-face interaction but, rather, offer new communication channels that can bridge the physically remote settings in which DLL takes place (Blake Reference Blake2005); they offer multiple modes for making meaning (Hampel & Stickler Reference Hampel and Stickler2012), which can be used simultaneously according to learner needs or strengths; multimodal tools also increase the potential for including interaction, collaboration and reflection within online assessment, while also introducing specific constraints (Wang & Chen Reference Wang, Chen, Xing, Xiang, Wang and Sun2013). In a large exploratory study, Hampel & Stickler (Reference Hampel and Stickler2012) focus on the ways in which interaction in online tutorials is influenced by the affordances of a videoconferencing environment, which combines text, voice, image and live audio. Among the key findings are the functions of the different modes: in this case the audio channel and text chat were both used for socialising, managing technology, task-based negotiation of meaning, student–student off-task conversations and teacher feedback. While the study was carried out over a relatively short period of just five weeks, it demonstrated that learners and teachers developed ways of using the multiple channels to optimal effect. However, the participants had relatively high self-perceived CMC competence and, concluding the study, Hampel & Stickler maintain that if the potential of the environments is to be realised by all users, ‘explicit training . . . has to be provided to enable students as well as teachers to successfully use multimodal synchronous online tools’ (p. 135). Taking control of the tools, adapting modes of interaction to the affordances of the environment, and developing awareness of new patterns of communication are identified as key skills for participants on the basis of this study. What is currently lacking, however, is knowledge of the ‘precise skills and strategies’ (p. 135, authors’ emphasis) that underpins the ability to adapt to and work within multimodal environments and the complex ways in which those environments develop and emerge in the course of interaction. Hence a key area for research arising from this study is:
Research task 6: Carry out a study to identify specific skills and strategies needed by learners to adapt to and operate in a particular multimodal distance language learning environment; this can then form the basis of a distance learner training programme
This research task calls for a judicious selection of both task(s) and multimodal environment, with perhaps a small initial pilot study with a separate group of learners to ensure that there is a degree of congruence between task, environment and the particular level of learner proficiency. The main study could usefully combine analysis of self-report data and tracking data: for the former, Ulitsky's (Reference Ulitsky2000) study into learner strategies in a multimedia language learning environment using pre- and post- interviews, pre- and post- questionnaires and reflective journals will be informative; for tracking data, Fischer's (Reference Fischer2007) article is instructive, in terms of the nature and contribution of that data, with reference made to learner training.
DLT has also been researched in the virtual world of Second Life (SL), in a language for specific purposes course, an area that continues to be the focus of DLL enquiry (see Arno-Macia Reference Arnó-Macià2012 for recent research). The distance language course described by Deutschmann, Panichi & Molka-Danielsen (Reference Deutschmann, Panichi and Molka-Danielsen2009) is conducted entirely within SL, and aims to improve the English language oral proficiency of doctoral students in talking about their research ‘in informal/formal conference and workshop contexts’ (p. 211). The research focuses on the ongoing development of optimal task design for oral participation in SL, in two sequential course intakes. Multimodality is central to the subsequent analysis of the linguistic signals that led to greater learner participation and interaction (Deutschmann & Panichi Reference Deutschmann and Panichi2009), based on data from the first and last sessions of the SL oral proficiency course. The study revealed changes in student linguistic behaviour, as they became more active in signalling involvement in the latter session, and showed that supportive linguistic behaviour by teachers was crucial in increasing learner engagement. Deutschmann & Panichi's work has begun to uncover some of the language awareness issues that occur in language teaching in SL, including how to signal involvement and why it is so crucial. As a ‘site of practice’ (Goodfellow Reference Goodfellow2007) where students are learning English for specific purposes as doctoral candidates, this study presents a particularly pertinent context in which to critically examine the claim advanced by Sykes, Oskoz & Thorne (Reference Sykes, Oskoz and Thorne2008) that there is a ‘danger of learning the pragmatics of the space and not necessarily skills of the L2 itself’ (p. 539). For these students, the immediate advantage of participating in SL rests on their ability to transfer the linguistic competencies acquired and demonstrated in SL to communicating their research in seminars, workshops and conferences. The question of transfer can be addressed to many DLL settings and of course to all classroom contexts where students require ‘horizontal expertise’ (Engeström, Engeström & Kärkkäine Reference Engeström, Engeström and Kärkkäinen1995) to use language within and across different settings. The following task is thus a priority, and is potentially of interest to many areas of language teaching research:
Research task 7: Investigate the transfer of speaking skills and interactive competence from distance language learning contexts (including Second Life, immersive environments or augmented reality settings) to other contexts and settings
In developing a research design to carry out this task, studies by Blake et al. (Reference Blake, Wilson, Cetto and Pardo-Ballester2008) and Heins et al. (Reference Heins, Duensing, Stickler and Batstone2007) will be useful in suggesting frameworks for measuring oral proficiency and the level and nature of interaction across different settings.
5. Learner contributions
Individual factors (Arispe & Blake Reference Arispe and Blake2012; Xiao Reference Xiao2012a) and the affective domain have long been recognised as of critical importance to the success of the practices of both distance students and teachers in a range of DLL settings (Holmberg Reference Holmberg1995; Pichette Reference Pichette2009; Xiao Reference Xiao2012b). A new approach is taken by de los Arcos, Coleman & Hampel (Reference de los Arcos, Coleman and Hampel2009) in examining anxiety as a social construct among distance learners of Spanish, using a constructionist perspective and discursive psychology approach in the context of audiographic conferencing. A strength of the study is that it charts shifts in beliefs from when learners first enter the course and as they progress through different learning settings and experiences, together with their attendant emotions. The study is also noteworthy for its fine-grained analysis of how students both perceive and experience different learning environments and the task of speaking within them. Although the research does not directly investigate speaking in face-to-face settings, the data suggests that learners’ perceptions and emotions related to speaking in a technologically-mediated setting may be very different from those in face-to-face settings. The research task below needs to take into account the complex and situated nature of affective experiences and could usefully combine both survey data and interviews for broad comparisons, followed by in-depth case studies.
Research task 8: Using a longitudinal approach, compare learner affective experiences using the target language in technology-mediated distance language learning settings and face-to-face settings
A series of studies have been conducted into the affective domain of DLL (Hurd Reference Hurd2007a, Reference Hurdb, Xiao & Hurd Reference Xiao and Hurd2010), a central strand of which has been the investigation of anxiety among distance learners of French at the Open University UK, through in-depth qualitative studies using think-aloud protocols, and large-sample questionnaire-based studies. An interesting comparative dimension to this work arose, in part, from Yan & Horwitz's (Reference Yan and Horwitz2008) call for future studies of language anxiety to include attention to the sociocultural factors associated with language learning. Hurd & Xiao (Reference Hurd and Xiao2010) investigate anxiety and affective control in two settings: among distance language learners of English at Shantou Radio and Television University in South China, and learners of French at the Open University UK. This study is noteworthy in that comparative studies in DLL are relatively rare (but see Blake et al. Reference Blake, Wilson, Cetto and Pardo-Ballester2008; Coleman & Furnborough Reference Coleman and Furnborough2010), and have tended to focus on learning outcomes. Hurd & Xiao explore the interplay between specific features of the context (including course workload, target language features and out-of-class learning opportunities, in the case of Chinese distance learners of English) and learner anxiety. A somewhat surprising finding relates to affective control: there was little evidence in either context for the use of affective strategies, despite these being generally identified as helpful in reducing anxiety. Thus while Hurd & Xiao's call for more research into anxiety and learner strategy training should be answered, any such programme should also be informed by research into students’ situated affective experiences, using the kinds of research tools mentioned in the previous research task. For the second part of the research task below, the researcher could draw on the research cycle proposed by White, Schramm & Chamot (Reference White, Schramm, Chamot, Cohen and Macaro2007), which consists of six interrelated phases of collaborative action research, including planning, data-collection, analysis, reflection and evaluation.
Research task 9: Conduct a study of students’ situated affective experiences of learning a language at a distance, in a given context; use the results to devise a learner training programme aimed at optimising control of affect at different stages of, and in diverse settings for, distance language learning
As mentioned earlier, a hallmark of DLL is the absence of direct teacher mediation of learning activities, certainly for a significant proportion of the curriculum. While attention is given to scaffolding learning through the ‘teaching voice’ in course materials, learners must nonetheless develop the ability to manage their own learning, and to match their needs with the target language sources available in the context. It is this feature which has made DLL such an interesting site for research into learner autonomy (Murphy Reference Murphy2008; Murphy & Hurd Reference Murphy, Hurd, Nicolson, Murphy and Southgate2011; White Reference White and Morrison2011; Fuchs, Hauck & Muller-Hurtmann Reference Fuchs, Hauck and Müller-Hartmann2012; Furnborough Reference Furnborough2012). A study by Hopkins (Reference Hopkins2010) breaks new ground in researching tasks where this design feature – the non-co-presence of the teacher – is built into speaking tasks that form part of the assessment in a distance language course at the Open University of Catalonia. A strength of the study is the identification and analysis of the contextual affordances which inform the design and development of scaffolded student-led speaking tasks, using an audiographic conferencing tool. Hopkins evaluates the tasks in terms of learner perceptions of their participation along two dimensions: satisfaction and usefulness for language learning. The study breaks new ground in beginning to explore student perceptions and preferences regarding the non-synchronous presence of a teacher, which is also a feature of many settings for language learning, including group work in face-to-face classrooms. The findings indicate that while most students did not indicate a preference for having a teacher present, and others indicated that the presence of a teacher in the assessed activity would have made them more nervous, a smaller group held contrary views; in some cases this was because they experienced technical issues, and in others because they did not see any purpose unless the teacher was there to provide feedback on errors. A key question is whether and how students adapt over time to the affordances in those student-led settings, as part of their developing individual and collaborative autonomy. Hopkins’ study opens up a significant and relatively unexplored area in DLL: student beliefs and perceptions in relation to the non-co-presence of a teacher in relation to specific tasks, an area which intersects with ongoing research into learner autonomy in distance settings. Hence, the following item:
Research task 10: Conduct a study to explore learner attitudes towards and perceptions about the non-co-presence of a teacher in relation to particular language tasks, and in relation to the development of individual and collaborative autonomy
The task entails fine-grained qualitative exploration of specific aspects of individual and collaborative autonomy through both reflective journals and stimulated recall interviews in relation to particular tasks and task features.
6. Future research revisited
Of the five areas that were identified for future research in White (Reference White2006), I will focus on just two, namely innovation and less commonly taught languages (LCTLs), as they arguably remain the least researched areas. A key challenge for the field is to address the gap between small-scale, often one-off, pilot innovations in DLL and sustained course delivery (White Reference White2006): within that gap, the processes of migrating small-scale innovations to contexts and curricula for mainstream course delivery were pinpointed as a key area for enquiry and critical reflection. The following research task remains a priority:
Research task 11: Provide a critical examination of the complexities inherent in migrating a small-scale innovation in distance language learning to mainstream course delivery
Beginning with a rich description of the small-scale innovation in a particular institutional setting, the study could be framed by the need to give simultaneous attention to such factors as technological innovation, pedagogical innovation, curricular congruence, teacher roles and identities, learner needs and preferences, and assessment. Given the complexity of the issues, the study could combine interviews with a range of stakeholders (including technical experts, course designers and teaching staff), observation of course design and development sessions, and analysis of critical incidents during course delivery and lessons learned. Alternatively, if the researcher had been involved in the initial small-scale innovation, an action research approach could usefully be adopted, especially as few such studies exist in DLT. Waters (Reference Waters2014) would be a helpful source for further ideas on research frameworks and research design relating to innovation in language teaching.
Additionally, a longitudinal tracing of ongoing innovation in the context of a single course and the refinement of those innovations in response to different forms of feedback and critical evaluation would shed further light on both sustained practices of innovation and the particular challenges of innovation in DLL course environments. The evolution of practices within the same course could be examined through course-by-course and cross-course analyses:
Research task 12: Using a multiple case study design investigate the ongoing processes of innovation within a single course and how the new practices influence specific features of student learning
In a study of the oral proficiency gains of learners of Spanish in classroom, hybrid and distance-learning formats, Blake et al. (Reference Blake, Wilson, Cetto and Pardo-Ballester2008) found that by the end of their first year of study, students across the three modes reached comparable levels of oral proficiency. The rationale for the study was the scepticism that exists in many quarters regarding the efficacy of developing oral skills in any contexts other than face-to-face classrooms. In the conclusion to their study, Blake et al. focus on LCTLs and the urgent need for DLL options, given the dispersed demand for LCTLs. The authors make a wider point, namely that the challenge rests with the language teaching profession to meet this demand, particularly in relation to the learning of non-Roman scripts in such LTCLs as Korean, Arabic and Punjabi. A key item for the future research agenda in relation to LCTLs is the following task, which would benefit from a detailed description of both the course environment and the approaches used to develop literacy skills, as in Blake & Shiri (Reference Blake and Shiri2012), which includes writing samples of specific tasks:
Research task 13: Conduct a study into the development of literacy skills in a non-Roman script LCTL through a distance language programme, at elementary, intermediate or more advanced proficiency level
The remoteness of teachers and researchers from the diverse sites in which learners pursue their acquisition of the target language is an ongoing challenge for all forms of enquiry into DLL and DLT. Taking as her starting point the understanding that autonomy can take a variety of forms, depending on individual learning contexts and learner characteristics, Murphy (Reference Murphy and Gardner2011) examines the nature of autonomy in the experiences of two distance language learners through a detailed longitudinal study. Central to the study is the notion that, in the absence of direct teacher mediation, distance language learners are involved in constructing and assuming control of a personally meaningful and effective interface between themselves, their attributes and needs, and the features of the learning context (White Reference White, Lewis and Hurd2008: 7). The study examines the extent to which the learners evaluated the potential affordances of the course components, target language sources and other aspects of the study environment; it also examines the extent to which they then created, selected and made use of tasks, experiences and other language speakers in keeping with their needs, preferences and goals as learners. Case studies in DLL research are rare yet exceedingly valuable in revealing the actual practices of distance language learners, their different agendas, which determine what they bring to and take from each teaching/learning encounter (Nunan Reference Nunan1989), and how individual learners construct the course from all the potential learning sources. Murphy's study was conducted with beginning learners of French, one of the three languages, along with Spanish and German, that are the most commonly researched languages in the distance mode. The call for research into the distance learning of LCTLs such as Chinese and Arabic (White Reference White2006; Blake et al. Reference Blake, Wilson, Cetto and Pardo-Ballester2008) could be usefully responded to with a replication of Murphy's study, supplementing the learning logs with in-depth interviews and other qualitative techniques. Such a study would give valuable insights for course designers and teachers into how students actually develop their proficiency from multiple sources. It could also be used as the basis for learner training and learner development activities.
Research task 14: Conduct a longitudinal case study of distance language learners of an LCTL to investigate how learners evaluate the potential affordances of the course and the learning sources within their wider environment; investigate how they work with those affordances to construct personally meaningful learning contexts in line with their needs and goals as language learners
7. Conclusion
Central to the stance of this research agenda is the need to identify research problems and to construct research designs which will extend the developing evidence base and theoretical underpinnings for DLL and DLT. For this, future enquiry needs to address emerging gaps in the literature, to be informed by previous studies, and, as an overarching goal, to provide an ongoing critique and revision of current theories. In this way the developing research agenda will contribute to wider avenues of enquiry in language teaching, in creating new research methodologies (for example in multimodal research) that build on the unique data sets available in those settings, thus clarifying the particular position of DLL and DLT in the wider field. As a closing comment I want to suggest that future research should balance rich theoretically informed studies of DLL in specific contexts, with robust higher level analyses of the dynamics of DLL across multiple iterations of programmes, at different scales of provision, and in comparative analyses across different contexts. All this suggests a challenging agenda for research into DLL and an equally compelling prospect of the potential of this rapidly developing field.
Cynthia White is Professor of Applied Linguistics, Massey University, New Zealand, and has published two books (Cambridge University Press, Multilingual Matters) and over 60 articles and chapters on distance and online language learning, learner autonomy, learning strategies, and identity and affect. She serves on the editorial boards of eight international journals and as external expert at the US National Middle East Language Resource Centre for Arabic distance learning initiatives. Her most recent projects include the study of affect, identity and community in digital language learning.
