Gender differences in Web 2.0 technology adoption among undergraduates in out-of-class context for autonomous ESL learning

Gender differences in Web 2.0 technology adoption among undergraduates in out-of-class context for autonomous ESL learning

<p>This study aimed to investigate the use of Web 2.0 technology for autonomous</p><p>language learning among undergraduates in regard to gender differences within the</p><p>context of higher education level in one of the public u...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Nur Fathiah Syahirah Ismail
Format: thesis
Language:eng
Published: 2021
Subjects:
PL Languages and literatures of Eastern Asia
Africa
Oceania
Online Access:https://ir.upsi.edu.my/detailsg.php?det=8684
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
id oai:ir.upsi.edu.my:8684
record_format uketd_dc
institution Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris
collection UPSI Digital Repository
language eng
topic PL Languages and literatures of Eastern Asia
Africa
Oceania
spellingShingle PL Languages and literatures of Eastern Asia
Africa
Oceania
Nur Fathiah Syahirah Ismail
Gender differences in Web 2.0 technology adoption among undergraduates in out-of-class context for autonomous ESL learning
description <p>This study aimed to investigate the use of Web 2.0 technology for autonomous</p><p>language learning among undergraduates in regard to gender differences within the</p><p>context of higher education level in one of the public universities in Perak, Malaysia.</p><p>The first objective was to identify the differences between the male and female</p><p>learners preferences of Web 2.0 tools for autonomous language learning. The second</p><p>objective was to investigate male and female learners reasons for their preferences of</p><p>Web 2.0 tools for autonomous language learning. The third objective was to</p><p>investigate how male and female learners used Web 2.0 technologies for autonomous</p><p>language learning. An explanatory sequential design was employed in the study by</p><p>using questionnaires and semi-structured interview as the instruments. The</p><p>questionnaires were analysed through inferential analysis by employing Chi-Square</p><p>Test while the interview was analysed through thematic analysis. Using random</p><p>sampling, 92 undergraduates from a public university took part in the survey. Using</p><p>purposeful sampling, 12 participants were selected for the interview; six of them were</p><p>males and six were females. The results suggested that there were no statistically</p><p>significant differences between gender differences and preferences towards Internet</p><p>platform for language learning. The results indicated that female learners were more</p><p>versatile, engaged in more purposeful-type of engagement with technologies, and</p><p>more motivated to learn language via technology as compared to male learners. Based</p><p>on the findings, pedagogically it is suggested that ESL teachers need to acknowledge</p><p>the different styles of technology adoption for autonomous language learning between</p><p>male and female learners. In addition, there is also a need to guide learners with skills</p><p>for autonomous language learning in order to make their out-of-class engagement</p><p>with English resources via the use of technology more meaningful</p>
format thesis
qualification_name
qualification_level Master's degree
author Nur Fathiah Syahirah Ismail
author_facet Nur Fathiah Syahirah Ismail
author_sort Nur Fathiah Syahirah Ismail
title Gender differences in Web 2.0 technology adoption among undergraduates in out-of-class context for autonomous ESL learning
title_short Gender differences in Web 2.0 technology adoption among undergraduates in out-of-class context for autonomous ESL learning
title_full Gender differences in Web 2.0 technology adoption among undergraduates in out-of-class context for autonomous ESL learning
title_fullStr Gender differences in Web 2.0 technology adoption among undergraduates in out-of-class context for autonomous ESL learning
title_full_unstemmed Gender differences in Web 2.0 technology adoption among undergraduates in out-of-class context for autonomous ESL learning
title_sort gender differences in web 2.0 technology adoption among undergraduates in out-of-class context for autonomous esl learning
granting_institution Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris
granting_department Fakulti Bahasa dan Komunikasi
publishDate 2021
url https://ir.upsi.edu.my/detailsg.php?det=8684
_version_ 1776104554187718656
spelling oai:ir.upsi.edu.my:86842023-02-13 Gender differences in Web 2.0 technology adoption among undergraduates in out-of-class context for autonomous ESL learning 2021 Nur Fathiah Syahirah Ismail PL Languages and literatures of Eastern Asia, Africa, Oceania <p>This study aimed to investigate the use of Web 2.0 technology for autonomous</p><p>language learning among undergraduates in regard to gender differences within the</p><p>context of higher education level in one of the public universities in Perak, Malaysia.</p><p>The first objective was to identify the differences between the male and female</p><p>learners preferences of Web 2.0 tools for autonomous language learning. The second</p><p>objective was to investigate male and female learners reasons for their preferences of</p><p>Web 2.0 tools for autonomous language learning. The third objective was to</p><p>investigate how male and female learners used Web 2.0 technologies for autonomous</p><p>language learning. An explanatory sequential design was employed in the study by</p><p>using questionnaires and semi-structured interview as the instruments. The</p><p>questionnaires were analysed through inferential analysis by employing Chi-Square</p><p>Test while the interview was analysed through thematic analysis. Using random</p><p>sampling, 92 undergraduates from a public university took part in the survey. Using</p><p>purposeful sampling, 12 participants were selected for the interview; six of them were</p><p>males and six were females. The results suggested that there were no statistically</p><p>significant differences between gender differences and preferences towards Internet</p><p>platform for language learning. The results indicated that female learners were more</p><p>versatile, engaged in more purposeful-type of engagement with technologies, and</p><p>more motivated to learn language via technology as compared to male learners. Based</p><p>on the findings, pedagogically it is suggested that ESL teachers need to acknowledge</p><p>the different styles of technology adoption for autonomous language learning between</p><p>male and female learners. In addition, there is also a need to guide learners with skills</p><p>for autonomous language learning in order to make their out-of-class engagement</p><p>with English resources via the use of technology more meaningful</p> 2021 thesis https://ir.upsi.edu.my/detailsg.php?det=8684 https://ir.upsi.edu.my/detailsg.php?det=8684 text eng closedAccess Masters Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris Fakulti Bahasa dan Komunikasi <p>Aghaei, S., Nematbakshs, M., & Farsani, H. (2012). Evolution of the world wide web: from web 1.0 to</p><p>web 4.0. International Journal of Web & Semantic Technology,3(1), 1-10. Doi:</p><p>10.5121/ijwest.2012.3101.</p><p></p><p>Aguilera-Hermida, A. P. (2020). College students use and acceptance of emergency online learning</p><p>due to covid-19. International Journal of Educational Research Open, 1, 100011. Doi:</p><p>10.1016/j.ijedro.2020.100011.</p><p></p><p>Ahmad, M. K., Adnan, A. H. M., Yusof, A. A., Mohd Kamal, M. A., & Mustafa Kamal, N. N. (2019).</p><p>Using new technologies to teach english in malaysia - issues and challenges. In MNNF Network (ed.),</p><p>Proceedings of the Int'l Invention, Innovative & Creative (InIIC) Conference, Series 1/2019 (pp.</p><p>203- 207). Senawang, NS: MNNF Network.</p><p></p><p>Ahmadi, D., & Reza, M. (2018). The use of technology in english language learning: a literature</p><p>review. International Journal of Research in English Education, 3(2), 115 125. Doi:</p><p>10.29252/ijree.3.2.115.</p><p></p><p>Akbulut, Y., & Kiyici, M. (2007). Note for editor: instructional use of weblogs. Turkish Online</p><p>Journal of Distance Education, 8(3), 6-15. Retrieved September 14, 2021 </p><p>from https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/tojde/issue/16921/176590.</p><p></p><p>Akhiar, A., Mydin, A. & Kasuma, S.A.A. (2017). Students perceptions and attitudes towards the use</p><p>of instagram in english language writing. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction (MJLI),</p><p>Special issue on Graduate Students Research on Education, 47-72. ISSN 2180-8110.</p><p></p><p>Alakrash, H. (2019). Motivation towards the application of ICT in english language learning among</p><p>arab EFL students. Journal of Advanced Research in Dynamical & Control Systems, 11, </p><p>1197-1203. Doi: 10.5373/JARDCS/V11SP10/20192963.</p><p></p><p>Al-Ali, S. (2014). Embracing the selfie craze: exploring the possible use of instagram as a</p><p>language mlearning tool. Issues and Trends in Educational Technology, 2(2),. University of</p><p>Arizona Libraries. Retrieved September 14, 2021 from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/150766/.</p><p></p><p>Al-Azawei, A., Parslow, P., & Lundqvist, K. (2017). Investigating the effect of learning styles in</p><p>a blended e-learning system: An extension of the technology acceptance model (TAM). Australasian</p><p>Journal of Educational Technology,</p><p>33(2). Doi: 10.14742/ajet.2741.</p><p></p><p>Al-Emran, M., Elsherif, H. M., & Shaalan, K. (2016). Investigating attitudes towards</p><p>the use of mobile learning in higher education. Computers in Human</p><p>behavior, 56, 93-102. Doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.033.</p><p></p><p>Alhaysony, M. (2017). Language learning strategies use by Saudi EFL students: The</p><p>effect of duration of English language study and gender. Theory and Practice</p><p>in Language Studies, 7(1), 18-28. Doi: 10.17507/tpls.0701.03.</p><p></p><p>Ali, Z. (2015). A case study of tertiary students experiences using edmodo in</p><p>language learning. International Journal of Language Education and Applied</p><p>Linguistics. Vol 2, 39-48. Doi: 10.15282/ijleal.v2.462.</p><p></p><p>Alm, A. (2006). Call for autonomy, competence and relatedness: motivating language</p><p>learning environments in web 2.0. The JALT CALL Journal, 2(3), 29-38.</p><p>ISSN:1832 4215.</p><p></p><p>Almeida, F. L. (2017). Concept and dimensions of web 4.0. International Journal of</p><p>Computers & Technology, 16(7), 7040-7046. ISSN 2277-3061.</p><p></p><p>Al-Said, K. M. (2015). Students' perceptions of edmodo and mobile learning and their</p><p>real barriers towards them. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology</p><p>TOJET,14(2),167-180. ISSN: 1303-6521.</p><p></p><p>Amornchewin, R. (2018). The development of SQL language skills in data definition</p><p>and data manipulation languages using exercises with quizizz for students'</p><p>learning engagement. Indonesian Journal of Informatics Education, 2(2), 85-</p><p>90. ISSN: 2549 0389.</p><p></p><p>Ayub, A. F. M., Hamid, W. H. W., & Nawawi, M. H. (2014). Use of internet for</p><p>academic purposes among students in malaysian institutions of higher</p><p>education. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 13(1),</p><p>232-241. ISSN:1303-6521.</p><p></p><p>Azmi, A. N., Kamin, Y., Noordin, M. K., & Nasir, A. N. M. (2018). Towards</p><p>industrial revolution 4.0: employers' expectations on fresh engineering</p><p>graduates. International Journal of Engineering & Technology, 7(4.28), 267-</p><p>272. Retrieved September 14, 2021 from</p><p>www.sciencepubco.com/index.php/IJET.</p><p></p><p>Balasubramanian, K., Jaykumar, V., & Fukey, L. N. (2014). A study on student</p><p>preference towards the use of edmodo as a learning platform to create</p><p>responsible learning environment. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences,</p><p>144, 416-422. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.07.311.</p><p></p><p>Banditvilai, C. (2016). Enhancing students' language skills through blended learning.</p><p>Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 14(3), 220-229. ISSN: 1479-4403.</p><p></p><p>Becirovic, S. (2017). The relationship between gender, motivation and achievement in</p><p>learning English as a foreign language. European Journal of Contemporary</p><p>Education, 6(2), 210-220. Doi: 10.13187/ejced.2017.2.210.</p><p></p><p>Behera, S. K. (2013). E-and M-Learning: A comparative study. International Journal</p><p>on New Trends in Education and Their Implications, 4(3), 65-78. ISSN:1309-</p><p>6249.</p><p></p><p>Benson, P. (2001). Teaching and researching autonomy in language learning. London,</p><p>Longman.</p><p></p><p>Benson, P., & Reinders, H. (Eds.). (2011). Beyond the language classroom. Springer.</p><p></p><p>Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative</p><p>research in psychology, 3(2). pp. 77-101. ISSN:1478-0887.</p><p></p><p>Cai, Z., Fan, X., & Du, J. (2017). Gender and attitudes toward technology use: a meta</p><p>analysis. Computers & Education, 105, 1-13. Doi:</p><p>10.1016/j.compedu.2016.11.003.</p><p></p><p>akr, R., & Tan, S. S. (2017). Development of educational applications on the social</p><p>network of Facebook and its effects on students academic achievement.</p><p>Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 17(5). Doi</p><p>10.12738/estp.2017.5.0273.</p><p></p><p>Candela, A. G. (2019). Exploring the function of member checking. The Qualitative</p><p>Report, 24(3), 619-628.</p><p></p><p>Chase, E. (2017). Enhanced member checks: reflections and insights from a</p><p>participant researcher collaboration. The Qualitative Report, 22(10), 2689-</p><p>2703.</p><p></p><p>Chen, C. P., & Wang, C. H. (2015, December). The effects of learning style on</p><p>mobile augmented-reality-facilitated English vocabulary learning. In 2015 2nd</p><p>International Conference on Information Science and Security (ICISS) (pp. 1-</p><p>4). IEEE. Doi: 10.1109/ICISSEC.2015.7371036.</p><p></p><p>Chin, V., Ling, T. H., & Yih, Y. J. (2016). Investigating english language anxiety</p><p>among uitm sarawak undergraduates. Journal of Creative Practices in</p><p>Language Learning and Teaching (CPLT), 4, 50-62. ISSN: 1823-464X.</p><p></p><p>Chun, D., Kern, R., & Smith, B. (2016). Technology in language use, language</p><p>teaching, and language learning. The Modern Language Journal, 100(S1), 64-</p><p>80. Doi: 10.1111/modl.12302.</p><p></p><p>Chung, E., Subramaniam, G., & Dass, L. C. (2020). Online learning readiness among</p><p>university students in Malaysia amidst covid-19. Asian Journal of University</p><p>Education, 16(2), 46-58. Doi: 10.24191/ajue.v16i2.10294.</p><p></p><p>Chung, L. Y., & Chang, R. C. (2017). The effect of gender on motivation and student</p><p>achievement in digital game-based learning: A case study of a contented-based</p><p>classroom. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology</p><p>Education, 13(6), 2309-2327. Doi: 0.12973/eurasia.2017.01227a.</p><p></p><p>Creswell, J. W. (2013). Steps in conducting a scholarly mixed methods study. DBER</p><p>Group Discussion on 20131114. University of Nebraska: Lincoln.</p><p></p><p>Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L., & Garrett, A. L. (2008). Methodological issues in</p><p>conducting mixed methods research designs. Advances in mixed methods</p><p>research, 66-83. In M. Bergman (Ed.), Advances in mixed methods research</p><p>(pp. 66-84). London: Sage.</p><p></p><p>Crompton, H., & Burke, D. (2018). The use of mobile learning in higher education: A</p><p>systematic review. Computers & Education, 123, 53-64. Doi:</p><p>10.1016/j.compedu.2018.04.007.</p><p></p><p>Davison, C. B., & Lazaros, E. J. (2015). Adopting mobile technology in the higher</p><p>education classroom. Journal of Technology Studies, 41(1), 30-39. Retrieved</p><p>September 14, 2021 from https://www.jstor.org/stable/90003804.</p><p></p><p>Davison, C., & Argyriou, E. (2016). Gender preferences in technology adoption: an</p><p>empirical investigation of technology trends in higher education. International</p><p>Journal of Gender, Science and Technology, 8(3), 405-419. Retrieved</p><p>September 14, 2021 from http://genderandset.open.ac.uk.</p><p></p><p>Dellah, N. F., Zabidin, N., Nordin, N. A., Amanah, F. H., & Atan, M. A. (2020).</p><p>Glossophobia: evaluating university students speaking anxiety in English oral</p><p>presentations. Jurnal ILMI, 10(1), 116-126. Retrieved September 14, 2021</p><p>from http://kuim.edu.my.</p><p></p><p>Dez, L. F., Valencia, A., & Bermdez, J. (2017). Agent-based model for the analysis</p><p>of technological acceptance of mobile learning. IEEE Latin America</p><p>Transactions, 15(6), 1121-1127. Doi: 10.1109/tla.2017.7932700.</p><p></p><p>Dizon, G., & Thanyawatpokin, B. (2018). Web 2.0 tools in the EFL classroom:</p><p>Comparing the effects of Facebook and blogs on L2 writing and</p><p>interaction. The EuroCALL Review, 26(1), 29-42. Doi :</p><p>10.4995/eurocall.2018.7947</p><p></p><p>Dubreil, S. (2020). Using games for language learning in the age of social distancing.</p><p>Foreign Language Annals, 53(2), 250-259. Doi : 10.1111/flan.12465.</p><p></p><p>Elaish, M. M., Shuib, L., Ghani, N. A., Yadegaridehkordi, E., & Alaa, M. (2017).</p><p>Mobile learning for English language acquisition: taxonomy, challenges, and</p><p>recommendations. Ieee Access, 5, 19033-19047. Doi:</p><p>10.1109/ACCESS.2017.2749541.</p><p></p><p>Ellis, R. (2010). The study of second language acquisition. London: Oxford.</p><p></p><p>Etikan, I., & Bala, K. (2017). Sampling and sampling methods. Biometrics &</p><p>Biostatistics International Journal, 5(6), 00149. Retrieved September 14, 2021</p><p>from https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net.</p><p></p><p>Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience</p><p>sampling and purposive sampling. American journal of theoretical and</p><p>applied statistics, 5(1), 1-4. Doi: 10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11</p><p></p><p>Firat, M., & Bozkurt, A. (2020). Variables affecting online learning readiness in an</p><p>open and distance learning university. Educational Media International, 57(2),</p><p>112-127. Doi: 10.1080/09523987.2020.1786772</p><p></p><p>Flick, U. (2007). Qualitative research designs. Designing qualitative research, Sage</p><p>Publications.</p><p></p><p>Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its</p><p>transformative potential in higher education. The internet and higher</p><p>education, 7(2), 95-105. Doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001.</p><p></p><p>Ghasemi, B., & Hashemi, M. (2011). ICT: Newwave in english language</p><p>learning/teaching. Procedia-social and behavioral sciences, 15, 3098-3102.</p><p>Doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.252.</p><p></p><p>Gheytasi, M., Azizifar, A., & Gowhary, H. (2015). The effect of smartphone on the</p><p>reading comprehension proficiency of Iranian EFL learners. Procedia-Social</p><p>and Behavioral Sciences, 199, 225-230. Doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.07.510.</p><p></p><p>Gilakjani, A. P. (2017). A review of the literature on the integration of technology</p><p>into the learning and teaching of english language skills. International Journal</p><p>of English Linguistics, 7(5), 95-106. Doi:10.5539/ijel.v7n5p95.</p><p></p><p>Gonzlez, N. F., Vianey, C. F., Hernndez, M. Z., & Gonzlez, E. F. (2019).</p><p>Facebook as a tool to learn English vocabulary. Revista de Docencia e</p><p>Investigacin Educativa, 5(16), 10-19. Doi: 10.35429/JTER.2019.16.5.10.19.</p><p></p><p>Goswami, A., & Dutta, S. (2015). Gender differences in technology usage-a literature</p><p>review. Open Journal of Business and Management, 4(1), 51-59. Doi:</p><p>10.4236/ojbm.2016.41006.</p><p></p><p>Graham, C. R. (2006). Blended learning systems. The handbook of blended learning:</p><p>Global perspectives, local designs, 1, 3-21. Retrieved September 14, 2021</p><p>from https://books.google.com.my/.</p><p></p><p>Granhemat, M., & Abdullah, A. N. (2017). Gender, ethnicity, ethnic identity, and</p><p>language choices of Malaysian youths: The case of the family</p><p>domain. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 8(2), 26-36. Doi:</p><p>10.7575/aiac.alls.v.8n.2p.26.</p><p></p><p>Grigoryan, T. (2018). Investigating Digital Native Female Learners' Attitudes towards</p><p>Paperless Language Learning. Research in Learning Technology, 26.</p><p>Doi.org/10.25304/rlt.v26.1937.</p><p></p><p>Heckel, C., & Ringeisen, T. (2019). Pride and anxiety in online learning</p><p>environments: Achievement emotions as mediators between learners'</p><p>characteristics and learning outcomes. Journal of Computer Assisted</p><p>Learning, 35(5), 667-677. Doi: 10.1111/jcal.12367.</p><p></p><p>Hilao, M. P., & Wichadee, S. (2017). Gender differences in mobile phone usage for</p><p>language learning, attitude, and performance. Turkish Online Journal of</p><p>Distance Education, 18(2), 68-79. ISSN: 1302-6488.</p><p></p><p>Hill, A., & Lee, J. C. (2021). Roamers: Audiences on the move across entertainment</p><p>platforms in Southeast Asia. Javnost-The Public, 1-17. Doi :</p><p>10.1080/13183222.2021.1932985.</p><p></p><p>Holec, H. (1981)Autonomy and foreign language learning. Oxford: Pergamon. First</p><p>published 1979, Strasbourg: Council of Europe.</p><p></p><p>Hossain, M. I., Yagamaran, K. S. A., Afrin, T., Limon, N., Nasiruzzaman, M., &</p><p>Karim, A. M. (2018). Factors influencing unemployment among fresh</p><p>graduates: A case study in Klang Valley, Malaysia. International Journal of</p><p>Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 8(9), 1494-1507. Doi:</p><p>10.6007/IJARBSS/v8-i9/4859.</p><p></p><p>Hrastinski, S. (2019). What do we mean by blended learning?. TechTrends, 63(5),</p><p>564-569. Retrieved September 14, 2021 from https://link.springer.com.</p><p></p><p>Husein, I. W., & Purnawarman, P. (2019). Low English proficiency students oral</p><p>interaction with native speaker through skype. Edusentris, 6(2), 79-94.</p><p>Retrieved September 14, 2021 from http://ejournal.sps.upi.edu.</p><p></p><p>Hussin, S., Manap, M. R., Amir, Z., & Krish, P. (2012). Mobile learning readiness</p><p>among malaysian students at higher learning institutes. Asian Social Science,</p><p>8(12), 276. doi:10.5539/ass.v8n12p276.</p><p></p><p>Internet World Stats. (2019). Retrieved February 5, 2019 from</p><p>https://www.internetworldstats.com/stats7.htm.</p><p></p><p>Iqbal, S., & Yongbing, L. (2017). Investigating gender influence on language learning</p><p>beliefs. European Journal of Education Studies. Doi</p><p>10.5281/zenodo.1036276.</p><p></p><p>Jabbari, N., & Eslami, Z. R. (2019). Second language learning in the context of</p><p>massively multiplayer online games: A scoping review. ReCALL: the Journal</p><p>of EUROCALL, 31(1), 92-113. Doi 10.1017/S0958344018000058.</p><p></p><p>Jena, A. K., Bhattacharjee, S., Gupta, S., Das, J., & Debnath, R. (2018). Exploring the</p><p>effects of web 2.0 technology on individual and collaborative learning</p><p>performance in relation to self-regulation of learners. Journal on School</p><p>Educational Technology, 13(4). ISSN: 0973-2217.</p><p></p><p>JobStreet. com. (2015). Employers: fresh graduates have unrealistic expectations.</p><p>Retrieved November 7, 2019 from www.jobstreet.com.my/careerresources/</p><p>employers-fresh graduates-unrealistic expectations.</p><p></p><p>Joferi, F., & Manap, N. S. (2018). Exploring factors that affect english proficiency</p><p>level among university students: a case study in universiti utara malaysia.</p><p>ISSN: 2462 1951.</p><p></p><p>Kaliisa, R., & Picard, M. (2017). A systematic review on mobile learning in higher</p><p>education: The African perspective. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of</p><p>Educational Technology, 16(1). Retrieved September 14, 2021 from</p><p>https://researchrepository.murdoch.edu.au.</p><p></p><p>Kasuma, S. A. A. (2017). Four Characteristics of facebook activities for english</p><p>language learning: a study of malaysian university students needs and</p><p>preferences. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 8(3), 155-171. Doi:</p><p>10.7575/aiac.alls.v.8n.3p.155.</p><p></p><p>Katyal, K. R., & Evers, C. W. (2014). Teacher leadership: new conceptions for</p><p>autonomous student learning in the age of the internet. London: Routledge.</p><p></p><p>Kent, R. A. (2015). Analysing quantitative data: variable-based and case-based</p><p>approaches to non-experimental datasets. London: Sage.</p><p></p><p>Kimbrell, J. (2013). The impacts of web 2.0, web 3.0, and web 4.0 technologies used</p><p>in distance education. Retrieved September 14, 2021 from</p><p>http://hdl.handle.net/10342/1821.</p><p></p><p>Klimova, B., & Kacet, J. (2017). Efficacy of Computer Games on Language</p><p>Learning. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 16(4),</p><p>19-26.ISSN: 2146 7242.</p><p></p><p>Kukulska-Hulme, A., & Traxler, J. (2007). Mobile teaching and learning. In Mobile</p><p>learning (pp. 41-60). Routledge.</p><p></p><p>Kumar, J. A., Rajamanickam, S., & Osman, S. (2020). Exploring the use of mobile</p><p>apps for learning: A case study on final year engineering undergraduates in</p><p>Malaysia. ASM Science Journal, 13(3), 63-67. Retrieved September 14, 2021</p><p>from www.researchgate.net.</p><p></p><p>Lai, C. (2015). Modeling teachers' influence on learners' self-directed use of</p><p>technology for language learning outside the classroom. Computers &</p><p>Education, 82, 74-83. Doi: 1016/j.compedu.2014.11.005.</p><p></p><p>Lai, C. (2015). Perceiving and traversing in-class and out-of-class learning: accounts</p><p>from foreign language learners in Hong Kong. Innovation in Language</p><p>learning and Teaching, 9(3), 265-284. Doi: 10.1080/17501229.2014.918982.</p><p></p><p>Lai, C., Li, X., & Wang, Q. (2017). Students perceptions of teacher impact on their</p><p>self directed language learning with technology beyond the classroom: cases</p><p>of Hong Kong and US. Educational Technology Research and Development,</p><p>65(4), 1105 1133. Retrieved September 14, 2021 from</p><p>https://link.springer.com.</p><p></p><p>Lee, C., Yeung, A. S., & Ip, T. (2016). Use of computer technology for English</p><p>language learning: do learning styles, gender, and age matter?. Computer</p><p>Assisted Language Learning, 29(5), 1035-1051. Doi:</p><p>10.1080/09588221.2016.1140655.</p><p></p><p>Lee, C., Yeung, A. S., & Ip, T. (2017). University English language learners'</p><p>readiness to use computer technology for self-directed learning. System, 67,</p><p>99-110. Doi: 10.1016/j.system.2017.05.001.</p><p></p><p>Mackey, A., & Gass, S. M. (2015). Second language research: Methodology and</p><p>design. Routledge.</p><p></p><p>Mahmud, M., & Nur, S. (2018). Exploring Students' Learning Strategies and Gender</p><p>Differences in English Language Teaching. International Journal of Language</p><p>Education, 2(1), 51-64. Doi 10.26858/ijole.v2i1.4346.</p><p></p><p>Majid, M. A. A., Othman, M., Mohamad, S. F., Lim, S. A. H., & Yusof, A. (2017).</p><p>Piloting for interviews in qualitative research: Operationalization and lessons</p><p>learnt. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social</p><p>Sciences, 7(4), 1073-1080. Doi: 10.6007/IJARBSS/v7-i4/2916.</p><p></p><p>Malaysia, E. I., & Lim, S. G. L. (2020). Chapter two English in malaysia: identity and</p><p>the market place. Malaysian Literature in English: A Critical Companion, 29.</p><p>Retrieved September 14, 2021 from https://books.google.com.my.</p><p></p><p>Mansor, N., & Rahim, N. A. (2017). Instagram in ESL classroom. Man in</p><p>India, 97(20), 107 114. Retrieved September 14, 2021 from</p><p>https://www.researchgate.net.</p><p></p><p>McLoughlin, C., & Lee, M. (2007). Social software and participatory learning:</p><p>Pedagogical choices with technology affordances in the Web 2.0 era. In R.</p><p>Atkinson, C. McBeath and A. Soong Swee Kit (Ed.). ICT: Providing Choices</p><p>for Learners and Learning. Proceedings ascilite Singapore 2007. Singapore:</p><p>Centre for Educational Development, Nanyang Technology pp. 664 - 675.</p><p></p><p>Meitalika, J., & Murtiningsih, S. R. (n.d) The Roles of Facebook as an Online</p><p>Medium for Learning English: A Survey.</p><p></p><p>Mistar, I., & Embi, M. A. (2016). Students perception on the use of WhatsApp as a</p><p>learning tool in ESL classroom. Journal of Education and Social Sciences, 4,</p><p>96104. ISSN: 2289-9855.</p><p></p><p>Mobinizad, M. M. (2018). The Use of mobile technology in learning English</p><p>language. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 8(11), 1456-1468. Doi:</p><p>10.17507/tpls.0811.10.</p><p></p><p>Morat, B. N., Shaari, A., Abidin, M. J. Z., & Abdullah, A. (2017). Youtube within esl</p><p>classroom:exploring an instructors and her learners experiences concerning</p><p>the authenticity of language and technology use. Malaysian Journal of</p><p>Learning and Instruction, 173-196. Doi: 10.32890/mjli.2017.7802.</p><p></p><p>Muhammed, A. A. (2017). The role of age and gender differences in language</p><p>learning: a case study on Kurdish EFL learners. English Language, Literature</p><p>& Culture, 2(5), 74. Retrieved September 14, 2021 from article.englishllc.org.</p><p></p><p>Munteanu, C., Molyneaux, H., Maitland, J., McDonald, D., Leung, R., Fournier, H.,</p><p>& Lumsden, J. (2014). Hidden in plain sight: low-literacy adults in a</p><p>developed country overcoming social and educational challenges through</p><p>mobile learning support tools. Personal and ubiquitous computing, 18(6),</p><p>1455-1469. Retrieved September 14, 2021 from https://link.springer.com.</p><p></p><p>Naciri, A., Baba, M. A., Achbani, A., & Kharbach, A. (2020). Mobile learning in</p><p>Higher education: Unavoidable alternative during COVID-</p><p>19. Aquademia, 4(1), ep20016. Doi: 10.29333/aquademia/8227.</p><p></p><p>Namaziandost, E., Sabzevari, A., & Hashemifardnia, A. (2018). The effect of cultural</p><p>materials on listening comprehension among Iranian upper-intermediate EFL</p><p>learners: In reference to gender. Cogent Education, 5(1), 1560601. Doi:</p><p>10.1080/2331186X.2018.1560601</p><p></p><p>Ng, L. S., Thang, S. M., & Noor, N. M. (2018). The usage of social networking sites</p><p>for informal learning: a comparative study between Malaysia students of</p><p>different gender and age group. International Journal of Computer-Assisted</p><p>Language Learning and Teaching (IJCALLT), 8(4), 76-88. Retrieved</p><p>September 14, 2021 from https://www.igi-global.com.</p><p></p><p>Ni, L. B. (2020). Blended Learning through Google Classroom. International Journal</p><p>of Educational and Pedagogical Sciences, 14(4), 220-226.</p><p>ISNI:0000000091950263.</p><p></p><p>Noh, Y. (2015). Imagining library 4.0: creating a model for future libraries. The</p><p>Journal of Academic Librarianship, 41(6), 786-797. Doi:</p><p>10.1016/j.acalib.2015.08.020.</p><p></p><p>Nomass, B. B. (2013). The impact of using technology in teaching English as a</p><p>second language. English language and literature studies, 3(1), 111.</p><p></p><p>OReilly, T. (2005). What is web 2.0? Retrieved August 14, 2019, from</p><p>http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-</p><p>20.htm.</p><p></p><p>Oga-Baldwin, W. Q., & Nakata, Y. (2017). Engagement, gender, and motivation: A</p><p>predictive model for Japanese young language learners. System, 65, 151-163.</p><p>Doi: 10.1016/j.system.2017.01.011.</p><p></p><p>Onwuegbuzie, A.J. & K.T. Collins (2007). A typology of mixed methods sampling</p><p>designs in social science research. The Qualitative Report 12.2. 281-316.</p><p>ISSN:1052-0147.</p><p></p><p>Orawiwatnakul, W., & Wichadee, S. (2017). An Investigation of Undergraduate</p><p>Students' Beliefs about Autonomous Language Learning. International</p><p>Journal of Instruction, 10(1), 117-132. ISSN: 1308-1470.</p><p></p><p>Orji, R. O. (2010). Impact of gender and nationality on acceptance of a digital library:</p><p>an empirical validation of nationality based UTAUT using SEM. Journal of</p><p>Emerging Trends in Computing and Information Sciences, 1(2), 68-79. ISSN:</p><p>2218-6301.</p><p></p><p>zkan, C. (2019). The relationship between students' success and their level of</p><p>foreign language anxiety and the primary sources of foreign language</p><p>speaking anxiety (Master's thesis, a niversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstits).</p><p></p><p>Padma, S., & Seshasaayee, A. (2011, September). Personalized web based</p><p>collaborative learning in web 3.0: a technical analysis. In International</p><p>Conference on Computational Science, Engineering and Information</p><p>Technology (pp. 162-170). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. Retrieved September</p><p>14, 2021 from https://link.springer.com.</p><p></p><p>Parmaxi, A., & Zaphiris, P. (2017). Web 2.0 in computer-assisted language learning:</p><p>a research synthesis and implications for instructional design and educational</p><p>practice. Interactive Learning Environments, 25(6), 704-716. Doi:</p><p>10.1080/10494820.2016.1172243.</p><p></p><p>Penaflorida, A. H. (2002). Nontraditional forms of assessment and response to student</p><p>writing: a step toward learner autonomy. Methodology in language teaching:</p><p>An anthology of current practice, 344-353. Retrieved September 14, 2021</p><p>from books.google.com.</p><p></p><p>Pillai, S. (2017). A study of the use of English among undergraduates in Malaysia and</p><p>Singapore. SARE: Southeast Asian Review of English, 48(1), 19-38. Retrieved</p><p>September 14, 2021 from http://mojes.um.edu.my.</p><p></p><p>Ping, A. M., Baranovich, D. L., Manueli, M. K., & Siraj, S. (2015). Promoting self</p><p>regulation in vocabulary learning among Chinese EFL learners: A needs</p><p>analysis. The Asia Pacific Education Researcher, 24(1), 137-146. Retrieved</p><p>September 14, 2021 from https://link.springer.com.</p><p></p><p>Poon, J. (2014). A cross-country comparison on the use of blended learning in</p><p>property education. Property management, 32(2), 154-175. ISSN: 0263-7472.</p><p></p><p>Putra, I., Saukah, A., Basthomi, Y. & Irawati, E. (2020). The Acceptance of the</p><p>English Language Learning Mobile Application Hello English Across Gender</p><p>and Experience Differences. International Journal of Emerging Technologies</p><p>in Learning (iJET), 15(15), 219-228. Kassel, Germany: International Journal</p><p>of Emerging Technology in Learning. Retrieved September 14, 2021 from</p><p>https://www.learntechlib.org/p/217973/.</p><p></p><p>Rabionet, S. E. (2011). How I learned to design and conduct semi-structured</p><p>interviews: an ongoing and continuous journey. Qualitative Report, 16(2),</p><p>563- 566. ISSN : 1052 0147.</p><p></p><p>Raja, R., & Nagasubramani, P. C. (2018). Impact of modern technology in</p><p>education. Journal of Applied and Advanced Research, 3(1), 33-35.</p><p>Doi:10.21839/jaar.2018.v3S1.165.</p><p></p><p>Reinders, H., & Benson, P. (2017). Research agenda: language learning beyond the</p><p>classroom. Language Teaching, 50(4), 561-578. Doi</p><p>10.1017/S0261444817000192.</p><p></p><p>Riazi, A. M., & Candlin, C. N. (2014). Mixed-methods research in language teaching</p><p>and learning: opportunities, issues and challenges. Language Teaching, 47(2),</p><p>135- 173. Doi:10.1017/S0261444813000505.</p><p></p><p>Romero, M. (2015). Work, games and lifelong learning in the 21st century. Procedia</p><p>Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 115-121. Doi:</p><p>10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.634.</p><p></p><p>Romero-Rodrguez, J. M., Aznar-Daz, I., Hinojo-Lucena, F. J., & Gmez-Garca, G.</p><p>(2020). Mobile learning in higher education: Structural equation model for</p><p>good teaching practices. Ieee Access, 8, 91761-91769. Doi:</p><p>10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2994967.</p><p></p><p>Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2011). Qualitative interviewing: the art of hearing data.</p><p>Sage.</p><p></p><p>Rudman, R., & Bruwer, R. (2016). Defining web 3.0: opportunities and challenges.</p><p>The Electronic Library, 34(1), 132-154. ISSN: 0264-0473.</p><p></p><p>Rusli, R., Md Yunus, M., & Hashim, H. (2018). Low speaking proficiency among the</p><p>Malaysian undergraduates: Why and how. Persidangan Antarabangsa Sains</p><p>Sosial dan Kemanusiaan, 678-689. eISBN: 978-967-2122-47-0.</p><p></p><p>Sadiku, M. N., Shadare, A. E., & Musa, S. M. Digital Entertainment. International</p><p>Journals of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software</p><p>Engineering ISSN: 2277 128X (Volume-7, Issue-8). Doi: :</p><p>10.23956/ijarcsse/V7I7/01710.</p><p></p><p>Sandelowski, M. (2000). Combining qualitative and quantitative sampling, data</p><p>collection, and analysis techniques in mixedmethod studies. Research in</p><p>nursing & health, 23(3), 246-255. Doi: 10.1002/1098-</p><p>240X(200006)23:3<246::AID-NUR9>3.0.CO;2H.</p><p></p><p>Sardegna, V. G., Lee, J., & Kusey, C. (2018). Selfefficacy, attitudes, and choice of</p><p>strategies for English pronunciation learning. Language Learning, 68(1), 83-</p><p>114. Doi: 10.1111/lang.12263</p><p></p><p>Sari, Z. E. (2020, October). Developing autonomous learning and Industry 4.0 skills</p><p>for non native learners through a self-access learning center. In Teacher</p><p>Education and Professional Development In Industry 4.0: Proceedings of the</p><p>4th International Conference on Teacher Education and Professional</p><p>Development (InCoTEPD 2019), 13-14 November, 2019, Yogyakarta,</p><p>Indonesia (p. 388). CRC Press. eBook ISBN: 9781003035978.</p><p></p><p>Segaran, K., Ali, A. Z. M., & Hoe, T. W. (2014). Usability and user satisfaction of 3D</p><p>talking-head mobile assisted language learning (MALL) app for non-native</p><p>speakers. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 131, 4-10. Doi:</p><p>10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.04.069</p><p></p><p>Sharma, G. (2017). Pros and cons of different sampling techniques. International</p><p>Journal of Applied Research, 3(7), 749-752. ISSN: 2394-5869. ISSN Online:</p><p>2394-5869.</p><p></p><p>Shih, R. C., Papa, C., & Cheng, T. F. (2013, December). Establishment of a mobileassisted</p><p>language teaching model for English teachers of technological</p><p>universities and colleges. In 2013 Second International Conference on Robot,</p><p>Vision and Signal Processing (pp. 144-147). IEEE. Doi:</p><p>10.1109/RVSP.2013.40.</p><p></p><p>Singh, Ajay S. "Common procedures for development, validity and reliability of a</p><p>questionnaire." International Journal of Economics, Commerce and</p><p>Management 5.5 (2017): 790-801. ISSN: 2348 0386.</p><p></p><p>Soleimani, E., Ismail, K., & Mustaffa, R. (2014). The acceptance of mobile assisted</p><p>language learning (MALL) among post graduate ESL students in UKM.</p><p>Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 118, 457-462. Doi:</p><p>10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.02.062.</p><p></p><p>Soleimani, E., Ismail, K., & Mustaffa, R. (2014). The acceptance of mobile assisted</p><p>language learning (MALL) among post graduate ESL students in</p><p>UKM. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 118, 457-462. Doi:</p><p>10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.02.062.</p><p></p><p>Thabane, L., Ma, J., Chu, R., Cheng, J., Ismaila, A., Rios, L. P., & Goldsmith, C. H.</p><p>(2010). A tutorial on pilot studies: the what, why and how. BMC medical</p><p>research methodology, 10(1), 1. Retrieved January 15, 2021 from</p><p>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2288/10/1.</p><p></p><p>Ting, S. H., Marzuki, E., Chuah, K. M., Misieng, J., & Jerome, C. (2017). Employers</p><p>view on importance of English proficiency and communication skill for</p><p>employability in Malaysia. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 7(2),</p><p>315-327. Doi:10.17509/ijal.v7i2.8132.</p><p></p><p>Traxler, J., & Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2016). Introduction to the next generation of</p><p>mobile learning. In Mobile Learning (pp. 1-10). London:Routledge.</p><p></p><p>Turhan, N. S. (2020). Karl Pearsons chi-square tests. Educational Research and</p><p>Reviews, 15(9), 575-580. Doi: 10.5897/ERR2019.3817.</p><p></p><p>Vinagre, M. (2005). Fostering language learning via email: An EnglishSpanish</p><p>exchange. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18(5), 369-388. Doi:</p><p>10.1080/09588220500442749</p><p></p><p>Wang, H. C., & Chen, C. W. Y. (2020). Learning English from YouTubers: English</p><p>L2 learners self-regulated language learning on YouTube. Innovation in</p><p>Language Learning and Teaching, 14(4), 333-346. Doi:</p><p>10.1080/17501229.2019.1607356.</p><p></p><p>Wiles, R., Crow, G., Heath, S., & Charles, V. (2008). The management of</p><p>confidentiality and anonymity in social research. International Journal of</p><p>Social Research Methodology. 11(5), 417-428. Doi:</p><p>10.1080/13645570701622231.</p><p></p><p>Wilson, V. (2016). Research methods: sampling. Evidence Based Library and</p><p>Information Practice, 11(1 (S)), 69-71.</p><p></p><p>Wong, G. K. W., & Yang, M. (2017). Using ICT to facilitate instant and</p><p>asynchronous feedback for students learning engagement and improvements.</p><p>In Emerging practices in scholarship of learning and teaching in a digital era</p><p>(pp. 289-309). Singapore:Springer.</p><p></p><p>Woolf, N. H., & Quinn, J. (2008). Evaluating peer review in an introductory</p><p>instructional design course. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 14(3), 20</p><p>42. Doi: 10.1111/j.1937-8327.2001.tb00217.x.</p><p></p><p>Wrigglesworth, J., & Harvor, F. (2018). Making their own landscape: Smartphones</p><p>and student designed language learning environments. Computer Assisted</p><p>Language Learning, 31(4), 437-458. Doi: 10.1080/09588221.2017.1412986.</p><p></p><p>Yakubu, M. N., & Dasuki, S. I. (2019). Factors affecting the adoption of e-learning</p><p>technologies among higher education students in Nigeria: A structural</p><p>equation modelling approach. Information Development, 35(3), 492-502. Doi :</p><p>10.1177/0266666918765907.</p><p></p><p>Yip, C., Han, N. L. R., & Sng, B. L. (2016). Legal and ethical issues in research.</p><p>Indian journal of anaesthesia, 60(9), 684. Doi: 10.4103/0019-5049.190627.</p><p></p><p>Yu, Z. (2017, February). The Characteristics and Methods of Autonomous Learning</p><p>of Higher Mathematics. In 2017 International Conference on Humanities</p><p>Science, Management and Education Technology (HSMET 2017) (pp. 1259-</p><p>1263). Atlantis Press. Doi: 10.2991/hsmet-17.2017.233.</p><p></p><p>Yunus, M. M., Lubis, M. A., & Lin, C. P. (2009). Language learning via ICT: Uses,</p><p>challenges and issues. Wseas transactions on information Science and</p><p>applications, 6(9), 1453-1467. ISSN: 1790-0832.</p><p></p><p>Yunus, M. M., Salehi, H., & Chenzi, C. (2012). Integrating social networking tools</p><p>into ESL writing classroom: Strengths and weaknesses. English language</p><p>teaching, 5(8), 42-48. Doi: 10.5539/elt.v5n8p42.</p><p></p><p>Yurdakul, C. (2017). An investigation of the relationship between autonomous</p><p>learning and lifelong learning. International Journal of Educational Research</p><p>Review, 2(1), 15-20. Doi: 0.24331/ijere.309968.</p><p></p><p>Zaidi, A., Awaludin, F. A., Karim, R. A., Ghani, N. F. C., Rani, M. S. A., & Ibrahim,</p><p>N. (2018). University students perceptions of YouTube usage in (ESL)</p><p>classrooms. International journal of academic research in business and social</p><p>sciences, 8(1), 541-553. Doi: 10.6007/IJARBSS/v8-i1/3826.</p><p></p><p>Zainuddin, S. Z. B., Pillai, S., Dumanig, F. P., & Phillip, A. (2019). English language</p><p>and graduate employability. Education+ Training, 61(1), 79-93. ISSN: 0040-</p><p>0912.</p><p></p><p>Zainuddin, Z., & Attaran, M. (2016). Malaysian students perceptions of flipped</p><p>classroom: A case study. Innovations in Education and Teaching</p><p>International, 53(6), 660-670. Doi: 10.1080/14703297.2015.1102079.</p><p></p><p>Zulkefly, F., & Razali, A. B. (2019). Malaysian Rural Secondary School Students'</p><p>Attitudes towards Learning English as a Second Language. International</p><p>Journal of Instruction, 12(1), 1141-1156. ISSN 1694-609X.</p><p></p><p>Zulkepli, N., Tajuddin, S. N. A. A., Atan, A., & Khaja, F. N. M. (2018). A study on</p><p>autonomous use of technology for language learning among ESL learners at</p><p>tertiary level. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and</p><p>Social Sciences, 8(11),1093-1107. Doi: 10.6007/IJARBSS/v8-i11/4986.</p><p></p>

Similar Items