MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4415779742 · doi:10.5539/elt.v18n12p1

The Effect of Using Theme-Based Blended Learning on Egyptian EFL University Students’ Oral Performance

2025· article· W4415779742 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Israa Ismael, Sen Li, Nasir Ali, Yousry Aly

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish Language Teaching · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlended learningParalanguageLanguage proficiencySample (material)MultimethodologySemi-structured interviewQualitative propertyQualitative researchControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines the effect of theme-based blended learning on Egyptian EFL university students' oral performance. In this context, barriers such as the influence of mother tongue, students’ huge number, restricted opportunities for authentic resources, and limited classroom time often hinder fluent and confident expression. To address these challenges, a mixed-method, quasi-experimental pre-/post-test design was employed with 30 intermediate-level second-year students from the Faculty of Business Technology at the Canadian International College. Across 17 blended sessions, students engaged with authentic themes using digital tools such as Jitsi Meet, Edpuzzle, Nearpod, and WhatsApp. Quantitative analysis using paired-sample t-tests revealed statistically significant differences in overall oral performance and across strategic, discourse, interactional, and paralinguistic competencies (η² > 0.90). Qualitative data from observations, recordings, and student reflections suggested improvements overall and each oral performance competency, particularly in intonation, topic maintenance, active listening, and use of fillers. The findings indicate that integrating authentic themes within a blended learning framework promotes sustained oral practice and provide meaningful exposure to authentic language contexts. Despite limitations such as the small sample size and absence of a control group, the study offers insights into the potential of theme-based blended learning to foster engagement and support oral proficiency development.

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)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnglish Language Teaching→Same topicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning→French-language works237,207→