2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.system.2018.05.012
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

How institutional and interpersonal variables impact international L2 students’ language gains at university

Abstract: As higher education has grown into a global enterprise, international students have become an integral part of the student population at many universities. Given this reality, it is striking that there are considerable gaps in our knowledge of whether and why international students make language gains, or fail to do so. In order to address these voids in research, this study employed a longitudinal mixed-methods design to measure oral and written gains made by international L2-Dutch students studying in univer… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
5
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
(45 reference statements)
1
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Given that Turkish would assist an international student in the larger community, but English is required for academic success, this finding is sensible. The important association between language and sociocultural adaptation is consistent with Deygers' [39] findings. Specifically, Deygers used a mixed-method approach to learn from quantitative findings that international students made little-to-no gains in the language of the host country in the first eight months of their adjustment.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…Given that Turkish would assist an international student in the larger community, but English is required for academic success, this finding is sensible. The important association between language and sociocultural adaptation is consistent with Deygers' [39] findings. Specifically, Deygers used a mixed-method approach to learn from quantitative findings that international students made little-to-no gains in the language of the host country in the first eight months of their adjustment.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…This analysis relies on comparing measurements of complexity (lexical: type/token ratio; syntactic: clauses/T-unit), accuracy (written: errors/T-unit; oral: errors/AS-unit), and fluency (written: words/T-unit; oral: pruned syllables/minute) over time. These results will be referenced below, but the analyses themselves have been reported in detail elsewhere (Deygers, 2018). All quantitative analyses were conducted with R Studio ( QuantPsyc and car packages).…”
Section: Methods and Proceduresmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Achieving an IELTS score alone is not the only predictor of whether or not their language will be sufficiently developed to study in English (Daller and Phelan 2013). Even 'successful' candidates admitted to a university face considerable challenges (Rea-Dickins, Kiely, and Yu 2007) and it is not necessarily the case that they will improve as they study (Deygers 2018). Research into university written work has revealed that there are some expected differences between the nature of IELTS writing tasks and academic activities in essay writing for university degree courses (Wingate 2017;Jenkins 2013).…”
Section: Balancing Authenticity With Other Key Assessment Factorsmentioning
confidence: 99%