You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
The effects of teachers' homework follow-up practices on students' EFL performance: a randomized-group design
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01528 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Pedro Rosário, José C. Núñez, Guillermo Vallejo, Jennifer Cunha, Tânia Nunes, Natalia Suárez, Sonia Fuentes, Tânia Moreira |
| Abstract |
This study analyzed the effects of five types of homework follow-up practices (i.e., checking homework completion; answering questions about homework; checking homework orally; checking homework on the board; and collecting and grading homework) used in class by 26 teachers of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) using a randomized-group design. Once a week, for 6 weeks, the EFL teachers used a particular type of homework follow-up practice they had previously been assigned to. At the end of the 6 weeks students completed an EFL exam as an outcome measure. The results showed that three types of homework follow-up practices (i.e., checking homework orally; checking homework on the board; and collecting and grading homework) had a positive impact on students' performance, thus highlighting the role of EFL teachers in the homework process. The effect of EFL teachers' homework follow-up practices on students' performance was affected by students' prior knowledge, but not by the number of homework follow-up sessions. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 69 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 14 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 7% |
| Researcher | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 13% |
| Unknown | 23 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 14 | 20% |
| Psychology | 14 | 20% |
| Linguistics | 4 | 6% |
| Arts and Humanities | 3 | 4% |
| Mathematics | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 12% |
| Unknown | 23 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 August 2016.
All research outputs
#14,827,133
of 22,830,751 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#16,102
of 29,819 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#154,273
of 279,229 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#338
of 537 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,830,751 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,819 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 279,229 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 537 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.