{"title":"The Effectiveness of Work-based Reflective Model for In-service Tertiary Tourism English Teachers’ Professional Development","authors":"Guihua Xie, Songporn Tajaroensuk, Sirinthorn Seepho","doi":"10.55766/uggq8906","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55766/uggq8906","url":null,"abstract":"With the increasing development of inbound and outbound tourism in China, a greater number of English-speaking tourism professionals are needed. To meet the needs, Tourism English programs were provided in universities and colleges in the country. However, problems occurred with the in-service professional development of Tourism English teachers, who were originally trained as language teachers. Existing training programs could not meet their professional needs. The present study aimed at exploring the effectiveness of the workshop based-on Work-based Reflective (WRB) Model for in-service Tourism English teachers’ professional development in the Chinese context. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected through pre and post-tests, teacher’s logs, mentors’ comments, a questionnaire and semi-structured interview. The findings showed that the WBR Model was effective in improving in-service Tourism English teachers’ professional development. It could significantly enhance the teachers’ knowledge concerning tourism operation and English teaching ability. It also enables teachers’ self-development through self-reflection.","PeriodicalId":145995,"journal":{"name":"Suranaree Journal of Social Science","volume":"160 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114731865","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Development of the English Content-Based Reading Materials for Buddhist Student Monks","authors":"Phatchareporn Supphipat, Sumalee Chinokul","doi":"10.55766/vime7423","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55766/vime7423","url":null,"abstract":"The objectives of this study were 1) to develop the English content-based reading materials for Buddhist student monks, 2) to explore quality of the English content-based reading materials by examining the attitude of student monks, and 3) to explore quality of the English content-based reading materials by examining the attitude of teachers. The study was conducted in 6 stages starting from the identification of needs to create materials to the evaluation of the effectiveness of the developed materials. The participants of 42 student monks and 3 English teachers were selected from the Education Department of Wat Phra Dhammakaya in academic year 2017. Instruments used were semi-structured interview, needs analysis questionnaires, and evaluation questionnaires. The qualitative data was analyzed by the content analysis. The statistics used to analyze the quantitative data were frequency, percentage, mean, and standard deviation. The findings revealed that the English content-based reading materials for Buddhist monks were effectively developed by using the materials development framework of Tomlinson (2011), embedded with Six-T’s approach of Stoller and Grabe (2017), and the quality was the academic and physical aspects and the effectiveness in enhancing reading comprehension. In terms of the quality of academic and physical aspects, student monks had a positive attitude towards 6 criteria including: content, organization of content, presentation of content, language use, activities applied, and layout and design, and teachers had a positive attitude towards 7 criteria, 6 of which were exactly the same as those of student monks plus the criterion of the teachers’ manual. This study clearly demonstrates theoretical processes of developing instructional materials of good quality and could be used as an example to illustrate the connection between developing instructional materials andEnglish language learning research for teachers, materials developers, and researchers in the field.","PeriodicalId":145995,"journal":{"name":"Suranaree Journal of Social Science","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125725528","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Lexical Collocations in a Sample Corpus of Nursing Research Articles (SCNRA)","authors":"Kantapat Trinant, Butsakorn Yodkamlue","doi":"10.55766/obxc3400","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55766/obxc3400","url":null,"abstract":"This corpus-based study was conducted in an attempt to facilitate the teaching and learning of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) and English as a Second Language (ESL) as well as English for Specific Purposes (ESP) by exploring lexical collocations in a Sample Corpus of Nursing Research Articles (SCNRA). The SCNRA, with a corpus size of over 1.25 million running words, was compiled from 300 research articles from 10 nursing journals. Under the set criteria, 717 keywords were obtained using the AntConc version 3.4.4. The majority of the keywords were nouns (63.51%), followed by adjectives (21.54%), verbs (13.44%), and adverbs (1.51%) respectively. The keywords then were used as “nodes” to find their “collocates” which generated 2,148 pairs of lexical collocations with 14 combination types, where six combination types were in accordance with the set framework adapted from Benson et al.’s (2010). The majority of them were Noun + Noun (41.39%), Adjective + Noun (28.4%), and Noun + Verb (11.17%) respectively. The lists of the keywords and the collocations produced are provided.","PeriodicalId":145995,"journal":{"name":"Suranaree Journal of Social Science","volume":"52 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114483013","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Exemplars of Truth","authors":"Theptawee Chokvasin","doi":"10.55766/fose5182","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55766/fose5182","url":null,"abstract":"<jats:p>-</jats:p>","PeriodicalId":145995,"journal":{"name":"Suranaree Journal of Social Science","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122540111","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Differences in the Test Results of Two Test Rubrics in the Yes/No Vocabulary Test","authors":"Wallapha Wongsirichan, Jeremy Ward","doi":"10.55766/ypzh1827","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55766/ypzh1827","url":null,"abstract":"The Yes/No vocabulary test (YN test) is a receptive vocabulary size test that comes in a form of a checklist where learners answer yes to the words they know. However, an inconsistency of the test rubrics has been found. That is, rubric type 1 says: “Write Y (yes) if you know the meaning of the word” while rubric type 2 says: “Write Y (yes) if you think that the word exists in English”. These 2 rubrics seem to require different levels of vocabulary knowledge from test takers. Rubric 1 may need more knowledge of the word meaning while Rubric 2 may need less (i.e. only having seen the word or even guessing). This led to the doubt whether or not the 2 rubrics yield the same YN test results. Therefore, a study was conducted to compare these two rubrics by administering 2 YN test versions, i.e. Rubric 1 YN tests and Rubric 2 YN tests, to 600 first-year students of a university in Nakhon Ratchasima, followed by a translation test as a concurrent validity test. After that, a semi-structured interview of 72 students was conducted in order to gain some insight of how they did the tests. The findings revealed that the results of Rubric 1 YN tests correlated better with the results of the concurrent validity test than those of Rubric 2 YN tests.","PeriodicalId":145995,"journal":{"name":"Suranaree Journal of Social Science","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129484157","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"การเทียบผลคะแนนแบบทดสอบสมิทธิภาพภาษาอังกฤษ แห่งมหาวิทยาลัยศรีนครินทรวิโรฒกับกรอบมาตรฐานอ้างอิงสากลของยุโรป","authors":"ชื่นจิตต์ อธิวรกุล, จิรดา วุฑฒยากร","doi":"10.55766/ctuu4836","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55766/ctuu4836","url":null,"abstract":"This study used standard setting to map SWU-SET scores onto the CEFR by employing Modified Angoff method. Fourteen experts judged each test item in the Srinakharinwirot University - Standardized English Test (SWU-SET) against the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) in order to recommend cut-off scores covering A2, B1, and B2 levels. The results showed that, based on 100 test items in the SWU-SET, test takers should achieve at A2 level if the scores range from 22-49, at B1 level from 50-77, and at B2 from 78 or above.","PeriodicalId":145995,"journal":{"name":"Suranaree Journal of Social Science","volume":"103 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117307132","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Limitations of the Open Mind","authors":"Theptawee Chokvasin","doi":"10.55766/qylg5084","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55766/qylg5084","url":null,"abstract":"<jats:p>-</jats:p>","PeriodicalId":145995,"journal":{"name":"Suranaree Journal of Social Science","volume":"30 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121678660","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}