Interactive Tutoring in Blended Studies: Hindrances and Solutions

Asim Ismail Ilyas (Al-Titinchy)


This paper distinguishes between traditional teaching known as lecturing (the teacher centered approach); and tutoring (the contemporary technology-oriented interactive teaching/learning approach). It is based on the implementation of tutoring strategies of ‘blended studies’  at the Arab Open University. It investigates the application of modern interactive teaching/learning strategies, specifying some hindering factors in the AOU-Jordan Branch context. The factors include four variables: tutors, students, course material and assessment. The paper is based on qualitative research in terms of a real teaching/leaning context, using both observation and conversation with learners, besides the use of some quantitative data retrieved from a questionnaire in which learners’ views are sought regarding a number of relevant matters. A number of suggested solutions related to each of the hindering factors are presented, which if applied, may secure shifting the balance of the teaching/learning process to a more interactive technology-based tutoring level, which in turn will enhance learners’ opportunities for the attainment of better academic standards, and secure a higher degree of achievement of the shared educational goals of learners and the educational institution they study in.                                                                                                                                                      



Blended studies, interactional teaching, lecturing, tutoring, course material, English language skills

Full Text:



Bloom, B. (1984). The 2 Sigma Problem: the Search for Methods of Group Instruction as Effective as One-to-one Tutoring. Educational Research, 13, 4-16.

Brophy, J. (2011). Teaching. Geneva, International Academy of Education, Unesco.

Ronald, C. (2004). Language and Creativity. New York: Routledge.

Chi MTH, Siler, S.A., Jeong, H.Y.T, & Hausmann, RG. (2001). Learning Tutoring from Human. Cognitive Science, 25, 471–533.

Crowe, A., Dirks, C., & Wenderoth, MP. (2008). Biology in Bloom: Implementing Bloom's Taxonomy to Enhance Student Learning in Biology. CBE Life Sci Educ, 7, 368-381.

Freire, P. (2005). The adult Literacy Process as Cultural Action for Freedom. In J. Maybin (ed.). Language and Literacy in Social Practice, London: the Open University.

Graff, H. (2005). The Legacies of Literacies. In J. Maybin (ed.) Language Literacy in Social Practice, London: the Open University.

Goodman, Sharon & Kieran O’Halloran. (2006). The Art of English: Literary Creativity. UK: Palgrave Macmilan & The Open University.

Handelsman J., Miller S., & Pfund, C. (2007). Scientific Teaching. New York: W. H. Freeman.

Lepper, MR., & Woolverton, M. (2002) the Wisdom of Practice: lessons learned from the study of highly effective tutors. In J. Aronson (ed.), Improving Academic Achievement. New York: Academic Press 135-158.

Majdoubeh, A.Y. (2014). Past, Status Quo, and Future of the Department of English. Arab World English Journal, Special Issue on Literature, 1, 134-149.

Maybin, J. (2005). Children’s Voices: talk, knowledge, and identity. In Graddol, D. et al, (ed.) Researching Language and Literacy in Social Context. London: the Open University.

Maybin, J., & Joan Swan. (2006). The art of English: Everyday Creativity. London: Palgrave Macmillan & the Open University.

Moravec, M., Williams, A., Aguilar-Roca, N. & O’Dowd, DK. (2010). Learn before lecture. CBE Life Science Education, 9, 473-481.

Oliver, M. & Trigwell, K. (2005). Can ‘Blended Learning’ Be Redeemed?. E– Learning, 2(1).

Parkash, V. (2009). Creative Learning. New Delhi: Viva Books.

Rockhill, K. (2005). Gender, Language and the Politics of Literacy. In: Janet Maybin, Language and Literacy in Social Practice. London: The Open University.

Schinske, JN. (2011). Taming the Testing/Grading Cycle in Lecture Classes Centered around Openend Assessment, J. Coll Science Teaching;40, 46-52.

Sing, H. (2003). Building Effective Blended Learning Programs. Educational Technology, 43(6), 51-54.

Slavin, R. (1987). Making Chapter 1 Make a Difference. Phi Delta Kappan.1987; 69, 110-119.

Smith, MK., Wood WB., Krauter, K., & Knight, JK. (2011). Combining Peer Discussion with Instructor Explanation Increases Student Learning from In-class Concept Questions. CBE Life Science Education, 10, 55–63.

Starbuck, D. (2008).Creative Teaching. India: Continuum International Publishing Group.

Tanner, K. & Allen, D. (2007) Cultural Competence in the College Biology Classroom. CBE Life Science Education, 6, 251-258

Tanner, KD. (20011). Moving Theory into Practice: a Reflection on Teaching a Large, Introductory Biology Course for Majors. CBE Life Science Education, 10, 113-122.

Wells, G. (1992). The Centrality of Talk in Education. In K., Norman (ed.) Thinking Voices: The Work of the National Oracy Project. London: Hodder and Stouton.

William, W., and Kimberly, T. (2012). The Role of the Lecturer as Tutor. CBE Life Science Education. Spring; 11(1), 3–9. doi: 10.1187/cbe.11-12-0110



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

2012-2019 (CC-BY) Australian International Academic Centre PTY.LTD

International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature

To make sure that you can receive messages from us, please add the journal emails into your e-mail 'safe list'. If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox', check your 'bulk mail' or 'junk mail' folders.