PhD Oral Exam - Tzu-Hua Chen, Education

When studying for a doctoral degree (PhD), candidates submit a thesis that provides a critical review of the current state of knowledge of the thesis subject as well as the student’s own contributions to the subject. The distinguishing criterion of doctoral graduate research is a significant and original contribution to knowledge.

Once accepted, the candidate presents the thesis orally. This oral exam is open to the public.

Abstract

International students pursuing further studies in English-speaking countries often encounter challenges, such as insufficient English proficiency, lack opportunities for social interaction, lack access to social contact and interaction with others using English, and lack of engagement with learning opportunities available. However, few solutions have been proposed to connect them with other international students and increase their psychological needs satisfaction of autonomy, competence, and relatedness and engagement during L2 interaction. In addition, few studies have investigated international students’ perception of the extent to which out-of-class task-based interaction may support their basic psychological needs and factors affecting their engagement.

Drawing on Deci and Ryan’s (1985) self-determination theory and adapting Philp and Duchesne’s (2016) model of task engagement, this study compared the effects of a collaborative (Mysterium) and a competitive (Camel up) commercial board game on 60 international students’ perceived basic psychological needs satisfaction of autonomy, competence, and relatedness on their engagement during board game interactions with other international students in an English-medium university in Canada. This study also explored the relationship between perceived psychological needs satisfaction and aspects of engagement with board game interactions. The secondary goal of this study is to explore international students’ perceptions of needs satisfaction as a result of board game interactions and factors influencing their engagement with board game interactions. Adopting a counterbalanced design, transcripts of players’ interactions were analyzed in terms of three dimensions of engagement: cognitive (asking questions, making evaluative comments, justifying an argument, elaborating and expanding ideas, generating new ideas, deciding on how to play the game), social (repeating each other’s utterance, completing each other’s utterance, use of simple and affiliative backchannels, encouraging each other to talk, reflecting on each other’s utterances and contributions), and emotional (self-perceived positive and negative emotions). Post-game questionnaires on psychological needs satisfaction and on overall engagement with board game interactions, as well as interaction data were analyzed through Wilcoxon signed-rank tests to compare the two types of board games. The relationships between psychological needs satisfaction and aspects of task engagement and were analyzed through Spearman’s rho correlation analyses. Two groups of international students’ responses to open-ended post-game questionnaires about needs satisfaction and factors affecting their engagement (N = 8), focus group interviews, and transcripts of interactions were analyzed through the lens of self-determination theory.

The findings showed that participants playing the competitive board game experienced significantly higher level of autonomy than playing the collaborative board game, whereas participants playing the collaborative board game experienced significantly higher level of relatedness than playing the competitive board game.

In terms of engagement with the board games, they had significantly higher level of cognitive engagement while playing the collaborative board game than the competitive board game, which was manifested in both their actual language use and questionnaire responses. However, although they reported significantly higher level of social engagement while playing the collaborative board game than playing the competitive board game, they produced significantly fewer responsiveness instances while playing the collaborative board game than playing the competitive board game. With respect to the link between BPN and aspects of engagement with the board game, it was found that international students who felt satisfied with their psychological needs of autonomy were emotionally engaged with the two types board games, whereas those who felt satisfied with their psychological needs of relatedness were socially engaged with both types of board games. Additionally, playing the collaborative board game enhanced their feeling of relatedness, which additionally made them emotionally engaged in English interaction with international students from diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds. Moreover, their feelings of competence were associated with responding to the coded measure of social engagement (peer players’ utterances and contribution). The study found that peer support and collaboration played a key role in satisfying the players’ psychological need of relatedness, regardless of board game types. Game design also played a crucial role in fulfilling or thwarting their psychological need of autonomy and competence for both competitive and collaborative board games. As for factors affecting L2 English international students’ engagement, the most prominent influencing factor for engagement with the two board games is game design, followed by game type. Collaboration with and support from peer players also played an important role in their engagement with the board games, especially the collaborative board game. Based on research results, implications for study abroad education were discussed.