Research trends of blended language learning: A bibliometric synthesis of SSCI-indexed journal articles during 2000–2019

Abstract

This study aims to synthesize research trends of blended language learning studies over the past two decades, from 2000 to 2019. Data were collected from the Web of Science, and a total of 60 SSCI-indexed journal articles were retrieved for bibliometric synthesis. Drawing on the revised technology-based learning model, participants, learning strategies, research methods, research foci, adopted technologies, and application effectiveness, advantages, and challenges were addressed. The findings demonstrated that publications were increasing rapidly, and that most articles were published in computer-assisted language learning, educational technology, and applied linguistic journals. The most common target language was English as a foreign language, and the most common learners were college students. In most studies, technologies were mainly used for the purposes of practice or exercises. Mixed, quantitative, and qualitative methods were frequently adopted, with a particular eye on the experiment design, questionnaires, and other specific methods in the second decade. Productive language skills, along with autonomy, satisfaction, and motivation, were major research foci. Language management systems and computer and web-based applications were frequently adopted technologies. Findings of application effectiveness, advantages, and challenges were summarized.

Effects of blended language learning on EFL learners' language performance: An activity theory approach

“…As shown in Figure 1, the AT has six categories, including subjects, objectives, community, tools, rules and labour division (Engeström, 1987(Engeström, , 2001. In this study, AT-related moderators were proposed based on existing literature: subjects refer to specifications about participants, including educational levels and sample size types, as they were reported to be important influencers for blended language learning (Li, 2022a). Objectives refer to learning targets, including language skills and outcome types, since blended learning supports learning differently for language skills (e.g., speaking, writing, reading, etc.)…”

“…The proposed framework of activity theory for blended language learning search engines (Google Scholar and Baidu Scholar) were used to exhaustively retrieve literature on blended language learning (see Figure 2). Motivated by related existing studies (Albiladi & Alshareef, 2019;Grgurovi c, 2017;Li, 2022a;Müller & Mildenberger, 2021) (Albiladi & Alshareef, 2019;Grgurovi c, 2017;Li, 2022a), along with snowballing technique (Biernacki & Waldorf, 1981) by scanning references section in the identified articles. Third, given the interdisciplinary nature of blended language learning that covers the interplay between CALL and educational technology (Li, 2022a), the extra manual search from discipline-related (e.g., CALL or EdTech) journals should be performed.…”

“…Besides the empirical attempts, a few review studies (Albiladi & Alshareef, 2019; Grgurović, 2017; Li, 2022a) to date have begun to synthesize blended language learning literature in an attempt to gain a holistic understanding of its current state. For instance, Grgurović (2017) reviewed 26 blended language learning studies published from 2000 to 2014, and concluded that future research should consider its theoretical background, effectiveness and participants.…”

“…Albiladi and Alshareef (2019) provided an overview of blended language learning research, and found that it could effectively develop learners' language skills and motivation. In a more recent systematic review, Li (2022a) synthesized research trends of blended language learning studies over the past two decades from 2000 to 2019, and found that 76.67% (46 out of 60) studies focus on EFL (English as a foreign language) learners.…”

“…On the other hand, while those review studies based on a qualitative survey of existing studies might provide a panoramic vision of blended language learning, little is still known about the overall effect size with a quantitative meta‐analysis, and how the effect was moderated by potential moderators. Since the directionality (positive vs. negative) and magnitude (0.25, 0.40, and 0.60 for small, moderate, and large, Plonsky & Oswald, 2014) of effect size could not only index the effectiveness of an intervention, but also inform pedagogy for practitioners and researchers alike (Li, 2022b, 2022c; Teimouri et al, 2019), it is necessary to carry out a meta‐analysis regarding the effectiveness of blended language learning and its potential moderators on EFL learners' language performance, which have progressively accumulated sufficient data sources as previously discussed (Li, 2022a).…”