How Do EFL Learners Interact and Learn English Communication Skills during a Role-Play Strategy?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate the comparative effectiveness of a role-play strategy vs. traditional learning methods in the achievement of English as a foreign language (EFL) learners to gain proficiency in communication skills. This paper reports results of an investigation on the effects of a role-play strategy in enhancing EFL students’ English communication skills when learning English as a foreign language. The current study took 2 months and used the English Achievement test and an observation timetable of communication skills with a sample of elementary school students in Saudi Arabia. The sample included 43 male pupils aged 10-13 years, at level five in an elementary government school in Al-Baha City.The results of the study show the existence of significant statistical variances between the pre- and posttest average scores of the EFL students who used role play for learning English skills, as well as those who did not use role play, hence learning English via traditional methods. The results favor the participants who used role play for learning the English language. The findings also show favorable variances for the experimental group while the pretest scores show no statistical variances among the EFL learners in the initial group and the other groups in their English skills achievement.Moreover, on the determination of the effectiveness of the role-play strategy on the improvement of the EFL learners’ communication skills, the results note a significant difference between the control and experimental conditions in terms of improving communication skills such as confirmation, repetition, imitation, and responding to other people by giving them examples, which was not available for learners in the control group. On the other hand, the participants in the control group improved their communication skills in areas such as clarification, explanation, and making statements during the application of the role-play strategy compared to their peers in the experimental group.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".