Spoken Skills, Communication Apprehension and Collaborative Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study examines the usage of collaborative learning on second language learners’ spoken skills and whether it reduces learners’ communication apprehension. Two groups of UiTM Perlis diploma students were divided into control and experimental groups. The experimental group was given a one-month treatment of collaborative activities. Pre-test and post-test were conducted to both groups using UiTM Speaking test format. Personal Apprehension (PRCA -24) questionnaire was also administered to both groups during the pre-test and post-test to check their level of communication apprehension. The results of the study show that there was an improvement in experimental group’s spoken skills and a considerable reduction in participants’ level of communicative apprehension after the treatment. The outcome of the study able to develop further understanding of what is involved in collaborative learning and works as an eye-opener to the possibilities of improving students’ spoken skills via collaborative activities. Key words: Spoken skills; Collaborative learning; Communicative apprehension; Second language learnersRésumé: L'étude examine les effets de l'apprentissage en collaboration sur les compétences orales des apprenants d'une deuxième langue et s'il réduit les appréhensions de communication des apprenants. Deux groupes d'étudiants au diplôme de l'UiTM Perlis ont été divisés en groupes de contrôle et d'expérimentation. Le groupe expérimental a eu des activités de collaboration pendant un mois. Le pré-test et le post-test ont été réalisés par les deux groupes en utilisant le format de test oral de l'UiTM. Le questionnaire de l'appréhension personnelle (PRCA -24) a également été donné aux deux groupes au cours du pré-test et du post-test afin de vérifier leur niveau de l'appréhension de communication. Les résultats de l'étude montrent qu'il y a eu une amélioration de compétences orales dans le groupe expérimental et une réduction considérable du niveau de l'appréhension de communication des participants après le traitement. Les résultats de l'étude sont en mesure de développer une meilleure compréhension de ce qui est impliqué dans l'apprentissage en collaboration et fonctionne comme un révélateur des possibilités d'améliorer les compétences orales des élèves via les activités de collaboration.Mots-Clés: compétences orales; apprentissage en collaboration; appréhension de communication; apprenants d'une deuxième langue
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".