MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412828881 · doi:10.56874/jeel.v6i1.2289

STUDENTS' PERCEPTIONS OF THE USE OF DIGITAL MEDIA IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNING

2025· article· en· W4412828881 on OpenAlexaff
Rizky Yolanda, Widi Syaftinentyas, Sati Juli Ayuri

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of English Education and Linguistics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiteracy, Media, and Education
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerceptionEnglish languageMathematics educationDigital mediaPsychologyComputer scienceLinguisticsWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines students' perceptions of the use of digital media in English language learning at Teacher Training and Education College of Insan Madani. Using a qualitative research approach, data were collected through semi-structured interviews with students enrolled in English language courses. The findings indicate that students perceive digital media as an effective and flexible tool that enhances their language acquisition. Platforms such as YouTube, Duolingo, Zoom, Google Classroom, and WhatsApp were particularly valued for their ability to provide authentic English exposure, interactive learning experiences, and opportunities for autonomous learning. However, despite the benefits, students also identified several challenges, including limited internet access, digital literacy gaps, and distractions from non-educational content. The study suggests that a blended learning approach, combining digital media with structured classroom instruction, could help mitigate these challenges and maximize the benefits of technology in English language learning. Additionally, institutions should focus on enhancing digital literacy training and improving internet accessibility to support students in effectively utilizing digital tools. This research contributes to the ongoing discourse on technology-enhanced language learning, particularly within the context of Islamic teacher training institutions, and provides insights for future studies on optimizing digital media use in English education.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of English Education and LinguisticsSame topicLiteracy, Media, and EducationFrench-language works237,207