Examining the implementation of academic vocabulary, lexical density, and speech rate features on OpenCourseWare and MOOC lectures

References

• Alami, M., Sabbah, M., & Iranmanesh, M. (2013). Male-female discourse difference in terms of lexical density. Research Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology, 5(23), 5365–5369. https://doi.org/10.19026/rjaset.5.4202
   Google Scholar
• Anthony, L. (2021). AntWordProfiler (Version 1.5.1) [Computer software]. Waseda University. https://www.laurenceanthony.net/software
   Google Scholar
• Camiciottoli, B. C. (2005). Adjusting a business lecture for an international audience: A case study. English for Specific Purposes, 24(2), 183–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2004.05.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Camiciottoli, B. C. (2020). The OpenCourseWare lecture: A new twist on an old genre? Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 46, 100870. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2020.100870
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dang, T. N. Y., & Webb, S. (2014). The lexical profile of academic spoken English. English for Specific Purposes, 33, 66–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2013.08.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dang, T. N. Y., Coxhead, A., & Webb, S. (2017). The academic spoken word list. Language Learning, 67(4), 959–997. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12253
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Derwing, T., & Munro, M. J. (2001). What speaking rates do non-native listeners prefer? Applied Linguistics, 22(3), 324–337. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/22.3.324
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fernández, J. V., & Webster, S. (2014). From OCW to MOOC: Deployment of OERs in a massive open online course. The experience of Universidad Carlos III de Madrid (UC3M). Open Praxis, 6(2), 145–158. https://doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.6.2.115
   Google Scholar
• Flowerdew, J.. (1994). Research of relevance to second language lecture comprehension: An overview. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic Listening: Research Perspectives (pp. 7–29). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gameel, B. G., & Wilkins, K. G. (2019). When it comes to MOOCs, where you are from makes a difference. Computers & Education, 136, 49–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.02.014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Griffiths, R. (1990). Speech rate and NNS comprehension: A preliminary study in time-benefit analysis. Language Learning, 40(3), 311–336. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1990.tb00666.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hansch, A., Newman, C., Hillers, L., Shildhauer, T., McConachie, K., & Schmidt, P. (2015). Video and online learning : Critical reflections and findings from the field. Retrieved 20 March 2021, from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2577882
   Google Scholar
• Kellogg, S. (2013). Online learning: How to make a MOOC. Nature, 499(7458), 369–371. https://doi.org/10.1038/nj7458-369a
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Liu, C. Y., & Chen, H. H. J. (2019). Academic spoken vocabulary in TED talks: Implications for academic listening. English Teaching & Learning, 43(4), 353–368. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42321-019-00033-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martinez, S. (2014, April 23–25). OCW (OpenCourseWare) and MOOC (Open course where?). Proceedings of OpenCourseWare Consortium Global, Ljubljana. http://cdlh7.free.fr/OCWC_2014/Final_papers/Paper_16.pdf
   Google Scholar
• MIT OpenCourseWare. (n.d.). About OCW. https://ocw.mit.edu/about/
   Google Scholar
• Nesi, H. (2001). A corpus-based analysis of academic lectures across disciplines. In J. Cotterill & A. Ife (Eds.), Language across boundaries: Selected papers from the annual meeting of the British association for applied linguistics (pp. 201–218). BAAL in Association with Continuum Press.
   Google Scholar
• Querol Julián, M., & Crawford Camiciottoli, B. (2019). The impact of online technologies and English Medium Instruction on university lectures in international learning contexts: A systematic review.
   Google Scholar
• Révész, A., & Brunfaut, T. (2013). Text characteristics of task input and difficulty in second language listening comprehension. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35(1), 31–65. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263112000678
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodero, E. (2012). A comparative analysis of speech rate and perception in radio bulletins. Text & Talk: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Language, Discourse & Communication Studies, 32(3), 391–411. https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2012-0019
   Google Scholar
• Shah, D. (2018). Year of MOOC-based degrees: A review of MOOC stats and trends in 2018. Class Central. https://www.classcentral.com/report/moocs-stats-and-trends-2018/
   Google Scholar
• Smith, N., Caldwell, H., Richards, M., & Bandara, A. (2017). A comparison of MOOC development and delivery approaches. The International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 34(2), 152–164. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJILT-09-2016-0047
   Google Scholar
• Stubbs, M. (1986). Lexical density: A computational technique and some findings. In M. Coulthard (Ed.), Talking about text. (pp. 27–42). Birmingham: English Language Research.
   Google Scholar
• Sun, Y. C., & Yang, H. C. (2012). Do language proficiency and lecture comprehension matter? OpenCourseWare lectures for vocabulary learning. Calico Journal, 29(4), 663–678. https://doi.org/10.11139/cj.29.4.663-678
   Google Scholar
• Tauroza, S., & Allison, D. (1990). Speech rates in British English. Applied Linguistics, 11(1), 90–105. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/11.1.90
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson, S. (1994). Frameworks and contexts: A genre-based approach to analyzing lecture introductions. English for Specific Purposes, 13(2), 171–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-4906(94)90014-0
   Google Scholar
• Ure, J. (1971). Lexical density and register differentiation. In G. Perren & J. L. M. Trim (Eds.), Applications of linguistics (pp. 443–452). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Van Zeeland, H., & Schmitt, N. (2013). Lexical coverage in L1 and L2 listening comprehension: The same or different from reading comprehension? Applied Linguistics, 34(4), 457–479. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ams074
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wagner, E., Liao, Y. F., & Wagner, S. (2021). Authenticated spoken texts for L2 listening tests. Language Assessment Quarterly, 18(3), 205–227. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2020.1860057
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wagner, E., & Toth, P. (2016). The role of pronunciation in the assessment of L2 listening ability. In T. Isaacs & P. Trofimovich (Eds.), Interfaces in second language pronunciation assessment: Interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 72–92). Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• Wingrove, P. (2017). How suitable are TED talks for academic listening? Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 30, 79–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2017.10.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yale Open Courses. (n.d.). Open Yale Courses. https://oyc.yale.edu/
   Google Scholar
• Zhu, M., Bonk, C. J., & Doo, M. Y. (2020). Self-directed learning in MOOCs: Exploring the relationships among motivation, self-monitoring, and self-management. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(5), 2073–2093. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09747-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar