The influence of a group of Chinese EFL teachers’ beliefs on lesson planning with video-based synchronous computer-mediated communication: A qualitative multiple case study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, Video-based Synchronous Computer-Mediated Communication (VSCMC) has been applied in EFL education for young Chinese learners. VSCMC teaching, as distinctive from face-to-face teaching, brings numerous planning challenges for teachers using technology. Research has shown that teacher beliefs significantly affect lesson planning for technology integration. However, teacher beliefs towards VSCMC specifically have been insufficiently studied in the field of EFL education for young learners. The purpose of this qualitative multiple case study was to explore how teacher beliefs influence lesson planning regarding VSCMC teaching. Semi structured interviews were conducted with six Chinese teachers of young EFL learners. The results indicated that participants had transitional pedagogical beliefs, strong self-efficacy beliefs, and a complex set of value beliefs towards VSCMC teaching. Accordingly, these beliefs motivated them to teach in VSCMC settings in particular ways and influenced their lesson planning processes in terms of determining learning objectives, designing course content, and choosing teaching methods.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".