Participating in a Blog: Jordanian EFL Learners' Voices
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates the Jordanian EFL learners’ perceptions towards language learning through blog. It seeks to assess the usefulness of blogging in enhancing learners’ English language skills. The participants of the present study included 10 post graduate Jordanian EFL Learners who attended English Intensive Course. Data were collected through semi-structured interview questions regarding learners’ feedback on their perceptions to the integrated blog. The data obtained from the semi-structured interview was recorded, transcribed and described by the researchers and finally analyzed qualitatively. The findings of the study revealed that the learners perceived the blog as an interesting and helpful learning tool since interacting via blog helped them improve their English language skills as well as their peer feedback. Hence, the blog played an important role for the Jordanian EFL learners as it allowed them to exchange their experiences and thoughts with peers. The study concluded that integration of social networks, such as blogs into Jordanian EFL learners’ classes could enhance their English language learning processes.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 it