MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3214906841 · doi:10.5539/jel.v11n1p87

“I Apology no no I Mean I Am Sorry … Please Let Me Explain That First”: Enhancing Communicative Language Competence of Thai University Students Through CEFR-Based Online Intercultural Communication

2021· article· en· W3214906841 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rutthaphak Huttayavilaiphan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Learning · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Phayao
KeywordsPsychologyIntercultural communicationCommunicative competenceCompetence (human resources)Communicative language teachingForeign languagePedagogyCultural competenceLanguage educationSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During this COVID-19 pandemic, no one can deny the value of online communication. It has saved our lives by preventing us from going outdoors and becoming infected, while also facilitating achievement of various personal and professional goals. Online communication can also assist us with our academic goals, whether it is used to communicate with supervisors or with people from other lingua-cultural backgrounds to practice the language. This form of communication is emphasized in the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) framework, which is one of the most significant guidelines for language teaching and learning throughout the world. The present research has two aims: first, to determine the extent to which CEFR-based online intercultural communication can improve Thai students’ communicative language competence, and second, to investigate Thai students’ attitudes toward CEFR-based online intercultural communication and international volunteers. The results received from 15 fifth-year dual B.A. (Chinese) and B.CM. (Traditional Chinese Medicine) students and international volunteers using various research instruments revealed that Thai students could increase their communicative language competence after participating in CEFR-based intercultural communication activities. This encompassed linguistic, sociolinguistic, and pragmatic abilities that correspond to the CEFR (2001) scales. In terms of attitudes, the study indicated that, because they were more confident in their communicative language ability, they had a positive attitude toward the CEFR-based online intercultural communication activities and their international volunteers. Finally, further research on this topic should include a proper design of online communication activities as well as methods for assessing students’ competency both before and after participation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Education and LearningSame topicEFL/ESL Teaching and LearningFrench-language works237,207