MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4320729472 · doi:10.5430/wjel.v13n2p260

The Effects of Using MS Teams Mobile Application on Language Learners’ Motivation During and After the Covid-19 Pandemic

2023· article· en· W4320729472 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Amjad Owais, Farah Alabedi

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of English Language · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicKnowledge Management and Sharing
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyCompetence (human resources)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Self-determination theoryAutonomyLearner autonomyPandemicPopulationLanguage acquisitionContext (archaeology)Mathematics educationMedical educationApplied psychologySocial psychologyLanguage educationMedicineComprehension approach

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Motivation has long been recognized as a critical component of language learners' success. According to Self-Determination Theory (SDT), an autonomously motivated student is more likely to be engaged in a learning activity. As the learners' needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness ought to be accommodated, these basic psychological needs of learners (BPNs) must be addressed to sustain autonomous motivation. Although there is a substantial number of literature that addresses the role of these three components in the context of mobile-assisted language learning (MALL) and their relationship to autonomous motivation (Kohnke, 2020; Alamer, 2021b; Kartal, 2019; Ali, 2019), the use of Microsoft Teams is almost never addressed. This study aimed to examine the relationship between the informal use of mobile apps by teachers, such as messaging applications, and their students' levels of motivation. This study involved one group of students divided into six sections with the same level of proficiency, who were enrolled in a foundation course in English at a private university in the United Arab Emirates (N = 344). The students were studied over a period of time (Phase 1 and Phase 2 groups of the same population). The analyses were carried out by the use of ANOVA with repeated measures and a t-test. Participants' autonomy and competence were found to have increased slightly as a result of the study. The study, however, failed to demonstrate any significant impacts on anxiety, self-confidence, engagement with language tasks, nor on actual achievement.

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 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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score0.285

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations10
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of English LanguageSame topicKnowledge Management and SharingFrench-language works237,207