In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

CUTE 95 6 CUTE: A Flexible Approach to the Integration of Online and Face-to-Face Support for Language Learning Debra Marsh, Eric Brewster, Nicola Cavaleri and Anny King Introduction The CUTE (Chinese University Teacher Training in English) Project is one of the component projects of the eChina-UK Programme. In its initial phase, which is known as CUTE 1 and is reported here, the project involved staff at the University of Cambridge (UoC) and Tsinghua University working collaboratively to design, develop and deliver two integrated English for Academic Purposes (EAP) course modules that combine online learning support materials with face-to-face (F2F) interaction. The aim of the CUTE Project is to develop a course which will enable Chinese teachers to teach their specialist subjects in English and to participate effectively in academic exchange. The project responds directly to a Chinese Ministry of Education (MoE) proposal, issued in 2001, that university lecturers should teach a proportion of their classes in English (see Spencer-Oatey, this volume, pp. 4–5 for more details). CUTE thus aims to develop an integrated online/F2F EAP course in order that Chinese university teachers may communicate more effectively and appropriately in English, teach specific subjects in English, and write and present papers in English at international conferences and colloquia. This chapter discusses the initial pilot phase of the CUTE Project, which explored an integrated online/F2F approach to language learning. This approach was founded on the fundamental principle of learner support and built upon the principle of the integration of online and F2F language support developed by the Language Centre at the UoC and implemented since 2000 through their Cambridge University Language Programme (CULP).1 e-Learning, Online Learning and Language Learning Despite the millions of dollars that have been spent [. . . ] we have [. . . ] failed to deliver on many of the earlier promises of e-learning. [. . . ] teachers have been drawn to assurances of 96 Debra Marsh, Eric Brewster, Nicola Cavaleri and Anny King increased quality of learning, while students have eagerly anticipated the opportunities for just-in-time, just-for-me, just-enough, learning. Unfortunately, evidence that these promises have been realised is thin on the ground. (Alexander 2004) Many today would agree with Alexander that the early e-learning initiatives of the 1990s resulted in varying degrees of success. Indeed, it is recognized that the early days of e-learning, with some notable exceptions, have left a legacy of unfulfilled promises in which a number of expansive claims were made but which, by the turn of the century, had simply not lived up to expectations. What, then, went wrong? In an attempt to find answers as to why early e-learning initiatives appear to have failed to live up to expectations, a number of key issues have been identified (Mitchell 2003; BECTA 2004). These issues serve as important lessons learned for anyone embarking on the latest e-learning initiatives. Firstly, the early e-learning initiatives were predominantly technology led. Persuasive arguments by vendors and computer experts alike for the widespread installation of learning management systems (LMS)2 appeared to suggest that the technology provided the backbone of e-learning. However, e-learning initiatives today tend increasingly to be led by the learning professionals themselves, with a clear view that we do not necessarily need the complexities of an LMS to support our learners learning online and that instead we should be exploring the appropriate use of the technology in response to learning and learner needs (Achacoso 2003). Secondly, early e-learning content was primarily focused on off-the-shelf, externally sourced generic resources which did not necessarily take into account individual and group learner needs. Much was made of the promises of reusable content which would be learner, context and even pedagogically neutral. This view has now evolved, and today we are seeing moves towards more tailored development, relevant to individual learner needs and the learning context (CIEL Project 2000; Conole and Dyke this volume). Thirdly, e-learning technology has been considered a ‘cost-saving’ way of eliminating the tutor. This view is increasingly losing value and the tutor’s role is today considered essential, to create, support and implement e-learning. The self-paced, ‘do-it-yourself’ approach for learners, with minimal support from either online tutors or other learners, did little to motivate the early online learner. Today, it is widely recognized that successful e-learning needs proactive support from tutors and greatly benefits from collaborative support from other learners. Second language...

Share