EFL Learners' Perceptions of Conversational Videos Regarding Classroom Engagement at a Language Center in Can Tho City
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54855/ijte.24438Keywords:
Conversational videos, classroom engagement, perceptions, language instructionAbstract
With the increasing integration of technology into language education, conversational videos have gained popularity for their ability to provide learners with rich content and context while facilitating language acquisition. However, there is still more to learn about how these videos affect student participation in the classroom, especially for Vietnamese students taking general English courses. This study addresses this gap by investigating students’ perceptions of conversational videos’ influence on classroom engagement at a foreign language center in Can Tho City, Vietnam. Using a mixed-method design, questionnaires and interviews were used to collect data from 30 intermediate Vietnamese learners in General English classes. The questionnaires were employed to explore the EFL learners’ opinions on the effectiveness of conversational videos through behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement. In addition, the data collected from the interviews were analyzed to provide detailed explanations in this study. The findings indicate that most learners appreciated the usefulness of conversational videos in enhancing three types of engagement in the classroom learning process. This research seeks to shed light on the effectiveness of integrating conversational videos into language instruction and its implications for enhancing learner engagement, thereby informing pedagogical practices in similar contexts.References
Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., & Furlong, M. J. (2008). Student engagement with school: Critical conceptual and methodological issues of the construct. Psychology in the Schools, 45(5), 369-386.
Berk, R. A. (2009). Multimedia teaching with video clips: TV, movies, YouTube, and mtvU in the college classroom. International Journal of Technology in Teaching & Learning, 5(1).
Carter, E., Reschly, A., Lovelace, M., Appleton, J., & Thompson, D. (2012). Measuring student engagement among elementary students: Pilot of the Student Engagement Instrument-Elementary Version. School Psychology Quarterly, 27(2), 61-73.
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of educational research, 74(1), 59-109.
Fredricks, J., & McColskey, W. (2012). The Measurement of Student Engagement: A Comparative Analysis of Various Methods and Student Self-report Instruments. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Student Engagement (pp. 763-782).
Harmer, J. (2001). The Practice of English Language Teaching. New York: Longman Essex.
Ho, T. V., & Le, T. T. (2022). The Effects of Video Materials on English-Major Students’ Learning. FOSTER: Journal of English Language Teaching, 3(4), 185-196.
Ly, N. M. C., Chu, T. D., Tran, T. H. A., & Pham, Q. A. (2024). Students’ Perception of Using YouTube to Learn English: A Case Study at Van Lang University. International Journal of TESOL & Education, 4(3), 20-45. https://doi.org/10.54855/ijte.24432
Ngo, D. H. (2021). Investigating the rationales behind student engagement in learning English at Ho Chi Minh City University of Food Industry. Journal of English Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics, 3(6), 87-94.
Nguyen, T. T. V., & Tran, T. T. M. (2024). Exploring Student’s Perspectives and Practices: Using TikTok in the Context of Sophomore EFL Speaking 4 Learning at Van Lang University. International Journal of TESOL & Education, 4(2), 160-182. https://doi.org/10.54855/ijte.24429
Phan, H. P. (2014b). Situating psychological and motivational factors in learning contexts. Education, 4(3), 53-66.
Pribadi, B. A. (2017). The influence of video-based learning on EFL student engagement and learning outcomes. Journal of Language and Education, 3(1), 33-45.
Reschly, A. L. & Christenson, S. L. (2006). Prediction of dropouts among students with mild disabilities: A case for the inclusion of student engagement variables. Remedial and Special Education, 27(5), 276-292.
Reschly, A. L., & Christenson, S. L. (2012). Jingle, jangle, and conceptual haziness: Evolution and future directions of the engagement construct. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 3-19). Springer.
Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., González-Romá, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample study. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3(1), 71-92.
Sherman, J. (2003). Using authentic video in the language classroom. Cambridge University Press.
Sidelinger, R. J. (2010). College Student Involvement: An Examination of Student Characteristics and Perceived Instructor Communication Behaviors in the Classroom. Communication Studies, 61(1), 87-103.
Sengsouliya, S., Soukhavong, S., Silavong, N., Sengsouliya, S., & Littlepage, F. (2020). An investigation on predictors of student academic engagement. European Journal of Education Studies. 3(2), 39-54. http://dx.doi.org/10.46827/ejes.v0i0.2793
Thanajaro, M. (2000). Using authentic materials to develop listening comprehension in the English as a second language classroom (Doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University)
Tran, L. K. H (2022). EFL Vietnamese student engagement in face-to-face learning environment. European Journal of Education Studies, 9(12), 382-297. http://dx.doi.org/10.46827/ejes.v9i12.4604
Upadyaya, K., & Salmela-Aro, K. (2013). Development of school engagement in association with academic success and well-being in varying social contexts: A review of empirical research. European Psychologist, 18(2), 136-147.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Tran The Phi, Nguyen Hoang Gia Khanh
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The copyright of all articles published in the International Journal of TESOL & Education (ijte) remains with the Authors, i.e. Authors retain full ownership of their article. Permitted third-party reuse of the open access articles is defined by the applicable Creative Commons (CC) end-user license which is accepted by the Authors upon submission of their paper. All articles in the ijte are published under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license, meaning that end users can freely share an article (i.e. copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format) and adapt it (i.e. remix, transform and build upon the material) on the condition that proper attribution is given (i.e. appropriate credit, a link to the applicable license and an indication if any changes were made; all in such a way that does not suggest that the licensor endorses the user or the use) and the material is only used for non-commercial purposes.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository, in a journal or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
