MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2556255770 · doi:10.5539/jel.v6n1p113

Perceptions of Turkish EFL Students on Online Language Learning Platforms and Blended Language Learning

2016· article· en· W2556255770 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Learning · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAnadolu Üniversitesi
KeywordsBlended learningTurkishMathematics educationPsychologyFlexibility (engineering)PerceptionLanguage acquisitionForeign languageAttendancePedagogyEducational technology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study is to examine the perceptions of EFL students studying English at the School of Foreign Languages, Anadolu University (AUSFL) on blended language learning and online learning platforms. The participants of the study consisted of 167 students whose English language proficiency level was B2 according to the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR). A questionnaire adapted from Owston, York and Murtha (2013) was used in the study.After application of the questionnaire, ten randomly selected students were interviewed about their perceptions of blended learning. Applying statistical and content analysis of the interviews provided a deeper understanding of students’ perceptions. Statistical analysis showed that students liked the idea of blended learning in terms of course format and attendance. Analysis of the interviews in terms of content revealed that students liked the flexibility of online learning, but preferred face-to-face communication with a teacher and classmates. In terms of their ideas about the online platforms of course books, their ideas varied. The students were mostly positive about using online language learning platforms. Even though the aim of the study was to get the perceptions of students, interviews were carried out with 5 teachers about students’ mid-term and final exam scores to get an idea if engaging in blended learning helped them learn better. Based on the results, certain implications were drawn from the study in order to organize future teaching at the AUSFL and implement a teaching environment utilizing blended language learning.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.680
Threshold uncertainty score0.413

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.357 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it