Search

The present study explores English as a foreign language (EFL) learners' processes and strategies when using machine translation (MT) tools in academic abstract writing. Eight EFL graduate students were introduced to translation-friendly writing strategies using Google Translate and were required to produce an English abstract with the aid of a machine translation tool. The study used qualitative and quantitative approaches in data collection and analysis. A triangulation process was developed and implemented, including think-aloud protocols during the writing session, surveys, and individual interviews after the writing session. The findings suggested that the translation-friendly writing strategies introduced to the participants were useful in enhancing the quality of their writing. Each participant demonstrated individual strategic uses of MT. Among the various strategies reported, back translation was the most commonly adopted one; that is, they first composed an abstract in Chinese (L1) and engaged in multiple rounds of translation between Chinese and English using MT; when problems were identified in the English abstract, they modified the Chinese abstract using translation-friendly writing strategies to enhance the quality of MT translation output. Most of the translation problems identified by the participants were related to non-academic expressions. While participants were satisfied with the quality of the abstracts produced with the aid of MT, they raised ethical concerns regarding the use of MT in academic writing. These findings suggest that MT has fundamentally changed the process of academic writing in English and call for the re-examination of the purpose of academic writing instruction and the approaches employed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study integrates service learning into English as a Foreign Language (EFL) speaking class using Web 2.0 tools – YouTube and Facebook – as platforms. Fourteen undergraduate students participated in the study. The purpose of the service-learning project was to link service learning with oral communication training in an EFL speaking class by having each student create two YouTube videos in which they made informative presentations about the university (e.g., transportation system) and the city (e.g., sightseeing spots) in English to international students on campus. A Facebook community was established as a forum for students to share their videos with the international students and peers. The results suggest that the project enhanced EFL students’ public speaking-related skills (e.g., idea and content development, and pronunciation), built their confidence in speaking English, and allowed them to develop their own learning process and strategies. Moreover, Web 2.0 tools endow service learning with new possibilities of reaching a greater number of the target audience and provide the members of the community with alternative means of communication. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Abstract: The purpose of the study is to explore English as a foreign language (EFL) college students’ needs in English for General Purposes (EGP) and English for Specific/Academic Purposes (ESP/EAP) courses in terms of their perceptions of three subcategories of needs—necessities, wants, and lacks—and reasons for students’ course enrollment. A questionnaire was administered to 972 EFL college students from six universities in Taiwan. The results showed that students had different perceptions of necessities, wants, and lacks in the different language skills taught in EGP and ESP/EAP courses. The findings also demonstrated discrepancies between the students’ perceptions of needs and the actual courses they took, thereby highlighting the importance of understanding needs as a complex, multiple, and conflicting concept. Finally, factors that determined students’ enrollment in EGP courses included necessities, short-term, and long-term goals while enrollment in ESP/EAP courses depended more on job relevancy. Implications for language instructors and curriculum designers are discussed. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]