MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393261729 · doi:10.5430/wjel.v14n3p504

The Impact of Virtual Learning on Students’ Engagement in the Saudi EFL Context: A Connectivism-Theoretic Perspective

2024· article· en· W4393261729 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ayman Khafaga, Hanan Maneh Al-Johani

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of English Language · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPrince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University
KeywordsConnectivismPerspective (graphical)Context (archaeology)Computer scienceMathematics educationPedagogyLearning theoryPsychologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Drawing on the connectivism learning theory (CLT), this paper probes the extent to which virtual learning (VL) influences students’ engagement (SE) in the Saudi EFL context. More specifically, this paper tests the hypothesis of whether or not VL improves SE in terms of eight learning variables: class attendance, class participation, the acquisition of the four language skills, learning anxiety, learning motivation, learning self-efficacy, willingness to communicate, and learning autonomy. This paper adopts a mixed-method approach, represented by both quantitative and qualitative methods of analysis and constituting two methodological instruments: a questionnaire and an interview. The sample consists of 256 EFL majors who are studying English at Prince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University, Saudi Arabia, and 14 EFL teachers who are teaching English at the same university. Three main findings are reported in this study: first, there is a positive attitudinal perception by the participants concerning the impact of VL on SE; second, VL increases students’ attendance, enhances their class participation, learning motivation, learning self-efficacy, learning autonomy, and willingness to communicate, and it decreases students’ learning anxiety; and third, SE is influenced by VL in terms of both productive and receptive language skills; positively, with regard to speaking and listening; and negatively, in terms of reading and writing. Pedagogically, the results of this paper necessitate reconsidering the efficiency with which new technologies are used in learning and teaching, and it is further anticipated to offer promising potential for the possibility of whether or not to completely depend on virtual learning in the near future.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.344 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of English LanguageSame topicOnline and Blended LearningFrench-language works237,207