An informal Facebook group for English language interaction : a study of Malaysian university students' perceptions, experiences and behaviours
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This study looks at a group of Malaysian university students’ perceptions, experiences and behaviours when presented with an informal, participatory Facebook interaction group for English language practice. Three methods of data collection, namely questionnaire, LMT100 Facebook interaction group, and semi-structured interview were employed in stages. \n \nThe findings show a discrepancy between the participants’ perceptions of using Facebook for English language learning (ELL), and their experiences and behaviours when presented with the interaction group. Only a quarter of the participants used the group actively by initiating interaction threads, and communicating with each other. A huge majority acted passively by making their participation visible just once or repeatedly through the means of likes and short comments. The rest of the members were silent readers who never made their involvement visible over the period of six weeks. \n \nThe students showed higher participation rate when presented with three topics; entertainment-based, grammar quizzes, and university-related inquiries. This was discussed as students’ selective interests and preferences in learning. The types of online content suitable for English language learning was also addressed. More passive interviewees reported small improvements in their communicative competence from the interaction activity. The active interviewees however only felt a boost in their confidence to use English publicly rather than experience enhanced English language ability. \n \nThe discrepancy between the students’ perceptions and behaviours are discussed from three levels of sociocultural influences which are personal, institutional, and societal. The students’ prior English language learning experience within an education system that privileges examinations may have influenced their (non)participation in the LMT100 group. The interviewees also indicated the existence of sentiments in racial, political, and religious issues, which may have influenced their learning experience at the university. \n \nThe findings indicate that the informal, unstructured English language interaction platform on Facebook as having great potentials, although not tremendously successful in this study. Several implications are presented as strategies that may assist the integration of Facebook for English language learning in the future. \n
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».