GlobEng_Whitepaper_Blended Case Study_121813

W H I T E PA P E R
Accelerated
Improvement in
Business English
through Blended
Learning
A case study of full-time and
part-time corporate programs
Lindsay Oishi, Ph.D.
Product Owner, Efficacy and Progress
GlobalEnglish
Cheri-Ann Nakamaru
Senior Product Manager, Learning and Strategy
GlobalEnglish
Revised
December 2013
Blended learning combines online
self-study with human coaching,
which can be in person or virtual. This
white paper presents a case study of
a custom blended learning program
created by GlobalEnglish for a large,
multi-national technology company.
Twenty-one employees needed to
make significant, rapid progress in
Business English proficiency in order to
fulfill new job responsibilities. After six
months, six participants who had studied
Business English full-time improved an
average of 50% (from Beginner to Low
Intermediate), and 14 participants who
had studied Business English for 4.5
hours per week improved an average of
9 to 12%. By the end of the program,
participants were able to successfully
assume global roles in their organization.

2WHITE PAPER: Accelerat ed I mprovement in B usiness En g lish Th rou gh Blen ded Lear n in g
At month four, [a regional director] said that he knew this program was the right thing
to do, and it was truly effective, because of the level of change and the confidence he
saw in the employees… In the past, there was always a language barrier.
— Client Program Manager
”
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
3 ....................Introduction 10 ....................Conclusion
4 ....................The Blended Programs 13 ....................About GlobalEnglish
6 ....................Research Methods 14 ....................About the Authors
8 ....................Results 15 ....................References
Combining online self-directed study with traditional face-to-face instruction is a popular technique in
adult English language teaching.1
Although the research on blended learning in ESL is growing, little is
known about the effectiveness of different kinds of blended learning programs for producing accelerated
gains in Business English.
In this study, twenty-one adult Japanese professionals employed at a large, multi-national technology
company participated in either a full-time blended learning program (34.5 hours per week, n = 6), or
a part-time, entirely virtual blended program (4.5 hours per week, n = 15). Both programs included
self-directed study with an online Business English curriculum, and twice-weekly virtual coaching sessions
with an experienced English language teacher. The full-time program also included in-person classroom
instruction, small group projects, and individual presentations. Twenty participants took a standard
assessment of Business English at the beginning of the program and again after six months. Although
individual compliance with the programs varied, test scores for the full-time group increased by an
average of 50%, and scores for the part-time group increased by 9 to 12%.
This case study provides evidence that virtual blended learning is an effective method for developing
Business English skills, specifically:
• An intensive blended program consisting of an online curriculum, integrated virtual coaching,
and in-person instruction can be effective at producing large language performance gains with
relative speed.
• A completely virtual blended program, with no face-to-face instruction and an overall time
commitment of less than five hours per week, can also produce significant improvements in
Business English.
“

INTRODUCTION
Learning English as a second or foreign language is a time-consuming endeavor. Although the time
it takes to learn English varies by individual and native language, research on adult ESL (English as a
Second Language) suggests that learners need at least 500 hours of direct instruction to attain everyday
communication skills.2
Even for non-native speaking children learning English at school in the United
States, proficiency can take four to seven years.3, 4
Within the traditional classroom paradigm, it is difficult
to make accelerated progress without enrolling in an intensive language program. Even then, success is
far from guaranteed.
In today’s business environment, however, professionals who have a compelling need to develop
their English skills typically do not have the time, budget or desire to attend a residential immersion
program. For this and other reasons, computer-assisted language learning via the Internet (also referred
to as “e-learning,” “online learning,” or “web-based learning,” among other terms) has become a
common methodology in corporate training.5
Most adults with computer and Internet skills are familiar
with computer-based learning, and commonly report positive attitudes towards such programs.6, 7
Furthermore, computer-based courses are often cheaper than instructor-led courses, and a large body
of research has demonstrated that they can be equally or more effective than traditional instruction.8, 9, 10
Organizations also frequently combine computer-based training with traditional instruction, a popular
approach called “blended learning”.11, 12
Although blended learning has historically included face-to-face
components, as educational technologies improve, it has become possible for blended learning to take
place without in-person interaction. Instead, learners and teachers can interact virtually via information
and communication technologies such as teleconference or voice-over IP (VoIP).
For this study, therefore, we defined blended learning as a combination of synchronous human
interaction (face-to-face, or virtual) and independent online study.
Using a case study methodology, we examined two questions currently unanswered in the research
literature:
• Can an intensive program with both in-person
and virtual blended learning modalities help
adults significantly improve their Business English
proficiency in a relatively short time frame
(about six months)?
• Can a completely virtual blended program also
produce significant and rapid gains in Business
English proficiency in the same time frame?

The first question introduces a new direction in the research: the extent to which a blended program
can replace a traditional in-person immersion course for adults learning Business English. The second
question also adds to the literature because to date, most empirical studies have focused on a definition
of blended learning that necessarily includes face-to-face instruction. By releasing blended learning from
this requirement, we can explore whether computer-mediated human interaction can work as well as
face-to-face teaching and learning.
THE BLENDED PROGRAMS
GlobalEnglish, a global provider of enterprise Business English solutions owned by Pearson PLC, designed
part-time and full-time blended learning programs that combined various pedagogical methods to meet
the client’s specific needs. These components are summarized in Table 1 and described further below.
The six individuals in the full-time group needed to progress from Beginner to Intermediate level of
Business English proficiency, and received daily in-person and online instruction and practice for a total
of 34.5 hours per week. The part-time group of 15 participants started the program at an Intermediate
level of Business English proficiency, and took part in virtual blended learning for 4.5 hours per week.
Type of study
Required hours per week
Full-time Part-time
Online
Asynchronous independent study, including formal curriculum and
informal learning resources
17 2.5
Synchronous sessions with coach via Skype or telephone 2 2
In person (full-time only)
Teacher-led group class 10
Individual and group projects 4.5
Group discussions or meetings 1
Total hours per week 34.5 4.5
Total program hours (28 weeks) 966 126
Asynchronous online study – both programs
During asynchronous study, participants progressed independently through the GlobalEnglish on-demand
Business English curriculum, for up to 2.5 (part-time) or 17 (full-time) hours per week. This time could
also include informal learning through an online website for collaborative, social language practice, and a
Table 1. Learning modalities and hours required in full-time and part-time blended learning programs

mobile application for individual vocabulary and pronunciation practice. Participants were free to allocate
their study time between formal and informal study; however, the program management encouraged
completion of the formal curriculum.
Synchronous online instruction – both programs
For synchronous study, participants worked individually with a certified, native English-speaking coach for
one hour, twice per week, via telephone or an Internet conferencing service (e.g., Skype). GlobalEnglish
provided the coaching service in partnership with ISUS (ispeakuspeak), and sessions included English
listening and spoken interaction practice at a level customized to each participant. Coaches also
addressed participants’ problems and questions with the online Business English curriculum, and drew
from the online resources available there to guide their sessions. In this way, the asynchronous and
synchronous components of the blended learning programs were fully integrated.
In-person instruction – full-time program only
The full-time program also included in-person (face-to-face) English language instruction and practice.
This group classroom training was specifically created to meet the level and needs of the six full-time
participants, and was organized to support their use of the online curriculum as well as their job-related
group projects and assignments. Instruction focused on improving the participants’ English speaking
proficiency, with the goal of increasing their confidence and ability to perform basic professional
functions in English (e.g., phone conversations, meetings, and short presentations). Instructors used a
combination of the provided online curriculum and their own materials.
Group and individual projects – full-time program only
The full-time program also included three projects: one
completed as a group, and two completed individually.
Each project took about one month and was designed
to be directly relevant to the participants’ jobs. In
the group project, participants wrote a proposal,
in English, to improve an aspect of working at their
company. In the two individual projects, participants
used English to deliver a ten-minute presentation,
either via telephone or in person, on assigned work-
related topics.

RESEARCH METHODS
Participants
21 Japanese adults (14 men and 7 women) participated in a blended learning program that took place
at their workplace, in Japan. All were regular full-time employees of a large, multi-national technology
company, working in a professional role within a department that provides internal company services.
There were six full-time program participants and 15 part-time program participants.
Materials
GlobalEnglish, a global provider of enterprise, on-demand Business English solutions owned by Pearson
PLC, provided all of the online and coaching components of the blended program. The GlobalEnglish
product suite available to participants in this study (Figure 1) provided formal and informal Business
English learning opportunities, expert real-time coaching, on-the-job support for business tasks,
collaboration tools, mobile practice and reference, adaptive Business English assessments, and the ability
to track activity and progress.e GlobalEnglish Product Suite
Figure 1. The GlobalEnglish Product Suite available to blended learning participants

Required learning tools
The main independent study portion of the blended program was done through GlobalEnglish Edge™,
a structured online curriculum designed for adults. It has eleven courses or “Levels”, from 0 (Low
Beginner) to 10 (Advanced), focusing on English in global business contexts. The curriculum is aligned
with the Common European Framework of Reference, and spans A1 (Breakthrough/Beginner) to C1
(Effective operational proficiency/Advanced).13
The human coaching component of the blended programs was provided through a service called
GlobalEnglish Coach™. GlobalEnglish partners with ISUS (ispeakuspeak) to offer native English speakers
with extensive ESL/EFL teaching and business experience as individual coaches for GlobalEnglish
subscribers. Coaches are certified in the GlobalEnglish Edge curriculum so that they can provide in-depth
guidance and instruction on the specific online assignments and resources.
Optional learning tools
All participants had access to two optional informal learning tools. The first, GlobalEnglish Bloom™,
is an online platform for collaborative, social language practice. Although use of this platform was not
guided or structured, participants were encouraged to use GlobalEnglish Bloom to supplement their
formal study. Available features include the ability to complete business-focused, video-based tutorials
(including additional material not available in the structured curriculum), take interactive quizzes, pose
questions and get answers from Business English experts and peers, and participate in asynchronous
group discussions.
The second informal learning tool that all participants could access was GlobalEnglish LinGo Pro™,
a mobile and web browser application that provides just-in-time learning functionality and English
productivity support. It features vocabulary lists organized by topic and industry, custom word lists,
flashcard practice, and the ability to look up word pronunciations, definitions and translations.
Assessment instrument
The assessment used for pre-test and post-test was the GlobalEnglish Standard Test for English
Professionals Plus™ (STEP+). GlobalEnglish STEP+ is an online, computer adaptive test that takes about
an hour to complete and includes four sections: Grammar, Listening, Reading and Speaking.
Test content focuses on situations relevant to global professionals. The test has a raw score range of
0 to 1,581, which corresponds to both a GlobalEnglish curriculum level (0 to 10) and a CEFR range
(A1 to C1).

RESULTS
Procedure
Twenty participants took the pre-test in August 2012, using their own computers, at a time and place
of their choice (one participant did not take the pre-test). Those who scored at or below Level 5 (Low
Intermediate) were placed into the full-time program. Both programs started in September 2012, and
participants took the post-test about six months later in March 2012. Data on participant activity in
the online components of the blended program was collected during the interim 28 weeks of active
participation. Both pre-test and post-test were not proctored.
Data on participant usage of the formal online curriculum and collaboration website was automatically
tracked using reporting technology built into the software. This recorded time spent studying online,
learning activities completed successfully, and number of logins to the collaboration site.
Program
(N = 21)
Mean hours per week
using structured
curriculum (SD)
Percent of required time
in formal curriculum
Mean learning activities
completed per week (SD)
Full-time (n = 6) 7.71 (5.11) 45.4% (of 17) 14.46 (2.11)
Part-time (n = 15) 1.29 (0.75) 51.6% (of 2.5) 3.43 (2.81)
At the end of the program, we had [participants] presenting to the head of the department’s staff,
and you could tell that by the end of it, they were very confident. Their English was good;
their grammar was good… they are light-years ahead of where they were.”
“
”
Activity in formal online curriculum
Participants in both blended programs spent about half of their required independent study time logged
in to the online curriculum, GlobalEnglish Edge (Table 2). For full-time participants, the average time spent
using the structured course materials was 7.71 hours per week (range: 3.38 – 16.33 hours), and for part-
time participants, the average was 1.29 hours per week (range: 0.1 – 2.28 hours). Within that time, full-
time program participants successfully completed, on average, a total of 433 discrete learning activities (SD
= 63), in which each activity took five to fifteen minutes. Successful completion was defined as answering
the questions within the activity with 70% accuracy (participants could attempt all activities as many times
as they wished). Part-time participants completed an average of 103 activities total (SD = 82).
Table 2. Time and activities completed online with formal curriculum (GlobalEnglish Edge)

Activity in collaboration website
Although it was not possible to track time spent on the collaboration website (GlobalEnglish Bloom), the
total number of sessions was recorded automatically. Most participants logged in infrequently, with seven
out of 21 logging in more than once per month on average. Among the other participants, the average
was about three sessions (M = 3.22, SD = 2.73). One active user, however, logged in 26 times.
Test results
In the full-time group (n = 6), the total score improvement was large (M = 217, SD = 62). Although
the small size of the group makes statistical inference inappropriate, in qualitative terms, the full-
time participants observed an average increase in test score from a mid-range A2 level (Waystage/
Elementary) on the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) to a low B1
level (Threshold/Intermediate).
In the part-time group (n = 14), the average total score improvement was 79 points (SD = 115). This
difference between pre-test and post-test was significant, W = 17, Z = -2.23, p < .05, r = .60. The
parametric version of the Wilcoxon signed rank test (paired-samples t-test) yielded a similar result,
t(13) = -2.58, p < .05. It is worth noting that the average score improvement in the part-time group was
significantly affected by the presence of one outlier who had a score decrease of nearly 200 points (out
of 1,581 possible). In Figure 2, the average score improvement for the part-time blended group is shown
without this outlier. Regardless, the average pre-test and post-test total scores within the part-time
group were associated with a CEFR level of mid-B1 (Threshold/Intermediate).
Figure 2. Mean pre-test and post-test scores by blended learning program.
Bars represent standard errors.

CONCLUSION
A lot of these employees were long-standing employees who had a lot of knowledge,
but we couldn’t benefit from that because we couldn’t communicate with them very well…
Now, we have the impact of gaining twenty-one global employees who can support
[the department] not only in Japan, but outside of Japan as well.
“
”
This case study demonstrates that an intensive blended program consisting of integrated online
curriculum, personal coaching, in-person instruction, and group work can be highly effective at
producing fast language performance gains. Six participants moved from Beginner to Intermediate in
Business English proficiency in about six months, with an average improvement of 50% on a formal
assessment from the beginning to end of the program. Participants’ progression from a CEFR level
of A2 to B1 in a total of 966 learning hours is on par with the estimate of how long English speakers
would take to make similar improvement in a moderately difficult language at the Defense Language
Institute.14, 15
In real-life terms, by the end of the program, these participants were able to successfully
prepare and deliver a ten-minute presentation on a business topic, in English, to their manager and
colleagues.
For the part-time blended program, we observed that a completely online course of study, requiring
less than five hours per week, also produced significant improvements in Business English. As the
part-time participants started at a higher level of proficiency than the full-time participants, it was
harder for them to make large gains; they also invested 126 hours total compared to 966 hours in
the full-time program. Nevertheless, the average improvement on the Business English assessment
among the fourteen part-time participants was 9 to 12 percent. In this small sample, then, a moderate
investment of time using a completely online solution produced valuable rewards.
The improvements observed in both blended programs are remarkable given that both developing
English proficiency and demonstrating it on a proficiency test are notoriously difficult. Unlike
achievement tests, which measure mastery of explicitly taught material, proficiency tests such as the
one used in this study are (at least theoretically) independent of curriculum. It is common, therefore,
for language learners to show little or negative change on proficiency tests, despite self-reported gains
in language ability.16, 17, 18
Among individuals living in the United States and attending workplace English

classes, for example, test scores on a common adult ESL assessment typically increase 3 to 7% after an
average of 66 to 100 hours of direct instruction.19, 20
Looking more closely at why the blended programs were effective, a key factor may be high personal
interactivity. In their meta-analysis of 51 empirical journal articles on distance learning, Zhao and
Tan note, “the right mixture of human [interaction] and technology seems most beneficial.”21
In a
subsequent meta-analysis of 74 studies of distance education, Bernard et al. found that interactivity (such
as between students, or between student and teacher) was positively related to both achievement and
attitude towards learning.22
In this study, the student-coach interaction was likely a strong motivating
factor as well as a direct learning stimulus for participants. As each student had his or her own individual
coach, it is possible that even though coaching was technology-mediated, it was experienced as more
intensely interactive than the one-to-many relationship of a teacher and students in a traditional face-
to-face language classroom. In fact, according to the company’s internal program manager, several
participants asked to continue working with their coaches past the official end of the program.
More broadly, this case study provides support for revising how we think of blended learning, and
moving beyond in-person, face-to-face instruction. Adults who need to learn English today want
maximum flexibility and choice with regard to how and when they learn; at the same time, technology
is constantly improving in its capacity to connect human beings, with compelling fidelity to real life.
Eliminating the need for physical travel for both learner and instructor reduces costs, increases time for
learning, and ensures maximum return on investment. In future research, we will continue to investigate
blended programs that combine online self-regulated learning with synchronous, technology-mediated
instruction instead of classroom attendance.

ABOUT GLOBALENGLISH
GlobalEnglish offers Business English solutions designed to improve
the communication and collaboration that drive high performance in
a global economy. An on-demand suite of Business English solutions
produces immediate productivity and performance gains by blending
the latest technological innovations with research on how adults
effectively develop language proficiency. GlobalEnglish provides
a comprehensive solution: formal and informal Business English
training, instant on-the-job support for business tasks in English,
enterprise collaboration, mobile productivity, adaptive Business English
assessments, and the ability to measure usage and improvement across
the company. GlobalEnglish experts located throughout the world help
companies maximize the value of their investment through custom
analysis and recommendations, coordinated program deployment and
ongoing support in 15 languages. Headquartered in Brisbane, California,
GlobalEnglish has partnered with more than 500 of the world’s leading
corporations and enterprises, including BNP Paribas, Capgemini,
Deloitte, GlaxoSmithKline, Hilton, John Deere, Procter & Gamble
and Unisys.
GlobalEnglish is accredited by the Learning & Performance Institute,
which demonstrates the company’s high standards of service delivery,
its strong commitment to the global community, and its record of
excellence in partnering with organizations that need to advance their
English language proficiency.
GlobalEnglish is owned by Pearson, the world’s leading learning
company. Learn more at www.GlobalEnglish.com.

ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Dr. Lindsay Oishi is the Product Owner for Efficacy and Progress
at GlobalEnglish. She has a BA from Georgetown University, an MA
from Oxford University, and a PhD in Educational Psychology from
Stanford University. Dr. Oishi has worked on research, assessment
and evaluation in both academic settings, including the Hasso Plattner
Institute of Design and the Stanford University Online High School, and
in business settings, at Hewlett-Packard and Adobe Systems. She has
written about online education and language learning in publications
for various organizations, including the International Association for
K-12 Online Learning, the California Foreign Language Project, and the
American Educational Research Association.
Cheri-Ann Nakamaru is the Senior Product Manager for Learning and
Strategy at GlobalEnglish, managing Blended Learning and Assessments.
She holds a BA in English and Sociology from the University of
Oregon, an MA-TESOL from Seattle University, and the Cambridge
ESOL CELTA certificate. Ms. Nakamaru has over 13 years of teaching
experience with students from all regions, from kindergarten through
adult professionals. She has taught in language schools and colleges in
Japan, Korea, and the United States. She is currently finishing a doctoral
degree in International and Multicultural Education at the University of
San Francisco.

REFERENCES
1.
Coryell, J.E., and Chlup, D.T. (2007). Implementing e-learning components with adult English language learners:
Vital factors and lessons learned. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 20(3), 263-278.
2.
Mainstream English Language Training Project. (1985). Competency-based mainstream English language training
resource package. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Refugee
Resettlement.
3.
Collier, V. P. (1989). How long? A synthesis of research on academic achievement in a second language. TESOL
Quarterly, 23(3), 509-531.
4.
Hakuta, K., Butler, Y. G., & Witt, D. (2000). How long does it take English learners to attain proficiency? The
University of California Linguistic Minority Research Institute, Policy Report 2000-1.
5.
Strother, J. B. (2002). An assessment of the effectiveness of e-learning in corporate training programs. The
International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 3(1), 1-17.
6.
Allen, M., Bourhis, J., Burrell, N., & Mabry, E. (2002). Comparing student satisfaction with distance education to
traditional classrooms in higher education: A meta-analysis. The American Journal of Distance Education, 16(2),
83-97.
7.
Derouin, R. E., Fritzsche, B. A., & Salas, E. (2005). E-learning in organizations. Journal of Management, 31(6),
920-940.
8.
Sitzmann, T., Kraiger, K., Stewart, D., & Wisher, R. (2006). The comparative effectiveness of web-based and
classroom instruction: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 59(3), 623-664.
9.
Kapp, K. M., & McKeague, C. (2002). Blended learning for compliance training success. EduNeering, Inc. Accessed
on July 23, 2013, at http://principalonline.ca/WhitePapers/blended-learning.pdf.
10.
Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Lou, Y., Borokhovski, E., Wade, A., Wozney, L., Wallet, P.A., Fiset, M., & Huang,
B. (2004). How does distance education compare with classroom instruction? A meta-analysis of the empirical
literature. Review of Educational Research, 74(3), 379-439.
11.
Bonk, C. J., & Graham, C. R. (2006). The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs. San
Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer Publishing.
12.
Kim, K. J., Bonk, C. J., & Teng, Y. T. (2009). The present state and future trends of blended learning in workplace
learning settings across five countries. Asia Pacific Education Review, 10(3), 299-308.
13.
Council of Europe (2001). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching,
Assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
14.
Association of the United States Army (2010). DLI’s language guidelines. Special Report, August. Accessed
July 23, 2013, at http://www.ausa.org/publications/ausanews/specialreports/2010/8/Pages/
DLI’slanguageguidelines.aspx.
15.
Estimate of hours based on DLI guidelines of 35 weeks to achieve Level 2 (limited working proficiency)
proficiency in Category II language, with 30 hours per week of direct instruction and practice. Defense Language
Institute Foreign Language Center (2009). General Catalog 2009-10. Monterey, CA: DFIFLC Pamphlet 350-8.

16.
Ekkens, K., & Winke, P. (2009). Evaluating workplace English language programs. Language Assessment Quarterly,
6(4), 265-287.
17.
Quintana Mazzini, S. N. (2013). The development of metacognitive learning strategies during an intensive English
course for English as Foreign Language (EFL) teachers (Doctoral dissertation).
18.
Luan, Y., & Guo, X. (2011). A study on the application of the immersion teaching model to EFL learners in
institutions of higher learning. English Language Teaching, 4(1), 152.
19.
Estimate based on observed gains of 4 or 5 points on the CASAS Life & Work Test after 90-100 hours direct
instruction. Ekkens, K., & Winke, P. (2009). Evaluating workplace English language programs. Language Assessment
Quarterly, 6(4), 265-287.
20.
Estimate based on 6-7% improvement in “exceptional workplace education programs” for intermediate ESL
learners after an average of 66 hours of instruction. Office of Vocational and Adult Education. (2005). Workplace
education program profiles in adult education. Washington, DC: Office of Vocational and Adult Education/ Institute
for Work and the Economy, DTI Associates, Inc.
21.
Zhao, Y., Lei, J., Yan, B., Lai, C., & Tan, S. (2005). What makes the difference? A practical analysis of research on
the effectiveness of distance education. The Teachers College Record, 107(8), 1836-1884.
22.
Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Borokhovski, E., Wade, C. A., Tamim, R. M., Surkes, M. A., & Bethel, E. C. (2009).
A meta-analysis of three types of interaction treatments in distance education. Review of Educational Research,
79(3), 1243-1289.
102113

GlobEng_Whitepaper_Blended Case Study_121813

More Related Content

What's hot (8)

Viewers also liked (12)

Similar to GlobEng_Whitepaper_Blended Case Study_121813 (20)

GlobEng_Whitepaper_Blended Case Study_121813