This eight-week randomized study examined how the order of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) feedback shaped revision and near-term independent writing among 132 Chinese English-as-a-foreign-language (EFL) undergraduates. Students received argument-first (AF; n = 67) or language-first (LF; n = 65) feedback; 64 pairs underwent within-class, within-pair randomization, and four unmatched students were randomized within class. Both modules were independently generated from each initial draft (D0) and locked before release. Students completed two revisions (D1 and D2) across three tasks and a new-topic, AI-free transfer task. Adjusted AF–LF differences in D0–D2 change favored AF for overall quality (0.811 points, 95% CI [0.424, 1.198]) and argumentation (1.102 points, 95% CI [0.668, 1.536]), but not language quality (0.020 points, 95% CI [−0.381, 0.420]). Revision depth and implementation showed stage-specific crossovers. Language contrasts did not survive primary Holm adjustment, although complete-pair sensitivity analysis detected a crossover. Argumentation transfer favored AF (1.057 points, 95% CI [0.508, 1.606]); overall transfer was less consistent, with the complete-pair interval including zero (0.685 points, 95% CI [−0.111, 1.481]). Module type was structurally linked to release stage, so stage-specific contrasts describe sequence-by-stage configurations rather than isolated content or order effects. The findings support cautious use of staged feedback when argumentative development is the instructional priority.
Students under preferential enrollment constitute a special group at top-tier universities in China. Although granted admission, these students may not be academically ready when compared with their counterparts who are admitted through regular enrollment. Nevertheless, they are subject to the same academic requirements, including foreign language courses, as other students. Consequently, most of them undergo severe challenges in college. To assist this special group of students, the present study focused on improving their English reading ability. This study was identified as a single-cohort exploratory study, embedded in a 16-week English course with 63 participants. Reading passages from the College English Test (CET), which include three types of testing formats (i.e., cloze, long, and short passages), were employed, considering that most of them need a satisfactory score on the test for further learning or job-seeking. Results showed that (i) students’ reading subskills developed at different levels and in different patterns; (ii) students’ overall English reading ability improved only slightly despite three cycles of interventions. The findings bring into light the challenge that both teachers and students encounter. It might arouse attention to the challenge faced by alternative enrollment students.
This study examines how university English-major students perceive opportunities for critical thinking in English as a foreign language (EFL) courses. Framed by affordance theory, it treats a resource, a classroom routine, or an assessment task as an affordance for reasoning only when the learner can detect it and act on it. Sixty-three undergraduate English majors at one Saudi university completed an adapted Learning Environment Affordance Survey for Critical Thinking (LEAS-CT) with five-point responses. Descriptive summaries, internal-consistency coefficients, and an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) with minimum-residual extraction, oblimin rotation, and parallel analysis were examined after duplicated export fields were removed. Students rated rich resources (M = 4.41, SD = 0.51), interactive negotiation (M = 4.43, SD = 0.54), and quality tasks (M = 4.37, SD = 0.58) similarly favourably. The confidence intervals around these means overlapped almost entirely, so the dimensions cannot be meaningfully ranked. Internal consistency was high for the two subscales for which item-level data were available. Because the sample was small and sampling adequacy borderline (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin = .50), the two-factor solution is reported as a provisional observation requiring replication rather than as a validation result. Perceived support for reasoning was distributed across materials, dialogue, and tasks rather than concentrated in one channel. Conclusions are confined to students' perceptions of the learning environment and are not evidence of critical-thinking performance or of its development; the single-site design, sample size, and measurement constraints are stated, and replication across institutions combining the survey with observation and student writing is proposed.
The aim of this qualitative descriptive research is to examine both the linguistic and discourse-level features of Medical English. The research employs a two-tiered approach: first, a linguistic analysis focusing on morphology, lexical density, syntax, and semantic evolution; second, a discourse analysis examining text organization, genre conventions, interactional patterns, and communicative practices. From a linguistic standpoint, Medical English is distinguished by its specialized terminology, extensive use of Greek and Latin roots, nominalized structures, passive constructions, and an expanding lexicon shaped by advances in numerous disciplines of Medical Sciences. At the discourse level, Medical English operates across multiple genres including clinical documentation, academic publications, and public health communication, each governed by established frameworks such as SOAP notes, IMRD structures, hedging strategies, and standardized phrasing in Medical research. As a result, Medical English has evolved beyond its traditional boundaries, emerging as dynamic and multifaceted domains of communication.
This study aims to examine inclusive practices in early childhood English education by focusing on how these practices support English language learning for children with special needs, highlighting instructional strategies, developmental benefits, and challenges encountered in early English language teaching contexts. A descriptive literature review was conducted by examining national and international studies on inclusive early childhood education and early English language learning. There is a growing emphasis on inclusive education in early childhood settings; however, there is a scarcity of research on how inclusive practices support English language learning for children with special needs. Despite the valuable benefits of integrating children with special needs into preschool English education, issues such as limited resources, inadequate teacher training, and difficulties in addressing diverse learner needs simultaneously may limit the effectiveness of inclusive practices. Therefore, understanding both the theoretical foundations and practical applications of inclusive education in early childhood English teaching is crucial for developing effective pedagogical approaches and ensuring equal learning opportunities for all children.
