Developing Intercultural Awareness and EFL Writing Skills of College-Level Students through Email Interaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study examines the efficiency of email exchange in developing intercultural awareness between the Saudi and non-Saudi EFL students and EFL native teachers of English from USA, UK and Canada. Qualitative content analysis was used to assess the participants’ use of email-based writing to develop both their intercultural awareness and their linguistic competence such as word-choice, collocations, and phrases of apologies, condolences, congratulations, exclamations, clich.s, discourse fillers and the like. Analyzing the participants’ data obtained through their email exchange over eight weeks of the first semester in 2017 along with the EFL teacher’s reflective reports and the researcher’s observation notes, the study revealed that both of the study groups developed their intercultural awareness and enhanced many of the L2 sociocultural issues. The project was proved to be a positive experience which may open doors for further pedagogical considerations. The study is also a communication channel for both groups to redress any sociocultural misunderstandings, biases or misconceptions. Both groups displayed supportive and constructive communication with each other.
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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".