Gratification obtained from television shows on Internet TV and conventional TV

Television shows once available only on conventional TV in homes at specific days and times are now available via Internet TV in nearly any location, 24 hours a day. However, while the shows may be the same on conventional TV and Internet TV, the motivations and benefits of viewing may be different for each delivery platform. This study employs uses and gratification theory (U&G) to compare audience rationales for watching television shows on conventional TV to watching TV shows on Internet TV. Research prior to the wide availability of Internet TV (Stafford et al., 2004) summarized reasons for watching television programs as 1) gratifications gained from the content of the program, 2) gratifications gained from the process of obtaining the program, and 3) gratifications gained from the social interactions that come from the consumption of television programming. Using those three gratifications, this study conducted an online survey among users of both conventional and Internet TV. The data indicated that on Internet TV, the process of watching shows to be the leading gratification. On conventional TV, the first motivation is the program content. The results of the survey offer suggestions for the management of Internet and conventional program services

Towards Understanding Astrophysical Effects of Nuclear Symmetry Energy

Determining the Equation of State (EOS) of dense neutron-rich nuclear matter is a shared goal of both nuclear physics and astrophysics. Except possible phase transitions, the density dependence of nuclear symmetry \esym is the most uncertain part of the EOS of neutron-rich nucleonic matter especially at supra-saturation densities. Much progresses have been made in recent years in predicting the symmetry energy and understanding why it is still very uncertain using various microscopic nuclear many-body theories and phenomenological models. Simultaneously, significant progresses have also been made in probing the symmetry energy in both terrestrial nuclear laboratories and astrophysical observatories. In light of the GW170817 event as well as ongoing or planned nuclear experiments and astrophysical observations probing the EOS of dense neutron-rich matter, we review recent progresses and identify new challenges to the best knowledge we have on several selected topics critical for understanding astrophysical effects of the nuclear symmetry energy.Comment: 77 pages. Invited Review Article, EPJA (2019) in pres

English Proficiency Assessments of Primary and Secondary Teachers and Students Participating in English in Action: Third Cohort (2014)

The purpose of the study was to assess the student learning outcomes of English in Action’s (EIA’s) school-based teacher development programme, in terms of improved English language competence (ELC),1 against recognised international frameworks (specifically, the Graded Examinations in Spoken English2 [GESE)]; Trinity College London 2013), which map onto the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR)3. Measurably improved student learning outcomes are the ultimate test of success of a teacher development programme. English Proficiency Assessments 2014 is a repeat of the study on the pilot EIA programme (Cohort 14) (EIA 2012), but focusing only on student ELC. The teachers and hence the students of Cohort 3 are substantially greater in number than in the pilot phase (347,000 primary students and almost 1.7 million secondary students compared with around 700 teachers, 35,000 primary students and over 83,000 secondary students in 2011). To enable this increase in scale, the programme has been delivered through a more decentralised model, with much less direct contact with English language teaching (ELT) experts, a greater embedding of expertise within teacher development materials (especially video), and a greater dependence upon localised peer support. This report addresses the following research question: "To what extent do the students of Cohort 3 show improved post-intervention EL proficiencies, in speaking and listening, compared with the Cohort 1 2010 pre-intervention baseline?

Classroom Practices of Primary and Secondary Teachers Participating in English in Action: Third Cohort (2014)

This study reports on the third cohort of teachers and students to participate in EIA (2013–14). While the students and teachers in Cohort 3 underwent an essentially similar programme to those in Cohorts 1 and 2, they are much greater in number (there are over 8,000 teachers and 1.7 million students in Cohort 3, compared to 751 teachers and 118,000 students in Cohort 1). To enable ongoing increases in scale, the SBTD programme became increasingly decentralised, with less direct contact with English language teaching (ELT) experts, a greater embedding of expertise within teacher development materials (especially video) and a greater dependence upon localised peer support. The purpose of this study was to ascertain whether there had been changes in the classroom practice of teachers and students participating in EIA Cohort 3 (2013–14). Previous research in language teaching has established that when teachers take up most of the lesson time talking, this can severely limit students’ opportunities to develop proficiency in the target language (Cook 2008); a general goal of English language (EL) teachers is to motivate their students to speak – and to practise using the target language (Nunan 1991). This study therefore focuses upon the extent of teacher and student talk, the use of the target language by both, and the forms of classroom organisation (individual, pair, group or choral work) in which student talk is situated. The study addresses two research questions: 1. To what extent do the teachers of Cohort 3 show classroom practice comparable to the teachers of Cohort 1, particularly in relation to the amount of student talk and the use of the target language by teachers and students, post-intervention? 2. In what ways do the teachers of Cohort 3 show improved classroom practice (particularly in relation to the amount of student talk and use of the target language by teachers and students) in contrast to the pre-intervention baseline? This study is a repeat of studies on Cohorts 1 & 2 (EIA 2011a, 2012a & 2014)