To Succeed Is to Believe: Comparison of Self-Efficacy Beliefs in Language Learning between Learner Groups of English and Swedish in Finland

In this thesis, I studied self-efficacy in the learning of English and Swedish in Finland. The theory of self-efficacy, which was created by Albert Bandura, suggests that the beliefs a person has of his or her capabilities in a certain task affect the person’s performance in the task. My aim was to study whether there are differences in self-efficacy beliefs between the learners of English and Swedish, and whether these beliefs correlate with the performance in the language in question. My hypotheses were that the learners of English have higher self-efficacy beliefs than the learners of Swedish and that self-efficacy beliefs correlate with language performance. The study was quantitative, and it consisted of a self-efficacy questionnaire and a language test which were distributed to students of English and Swedish in an upper secondary school in Rovaniemi. The study was answered by 137 students, of whom 93 were learners of English and 44 were learners of Swedish. The results indicated that the learners of English had a higher sense of efficacy than the learners of Swedish. The analysis proved that there was a significant correlation between English students’ self-efficacy and their performance in the language measured by the test and the grades. In addition, a significant correlation existed between Swedish students’ self-efficacy and their grades. However, there was no correlation between the Swedish students’ self-efficacy and their test results. The difference in the self-efficacy beliefs of the two language groups indicates that people in Finland are more confident in using English than Swedish, which also implies that English is more valued in Finnish society than Swedish. It is important to acknowledge the lower self-efficacy beliefs in Swedish because various studies have proven that self-efficacy affects academic achievement. As a suggestion for further research, the self-efficacy beliefs of different language groups could be compared in a qualitative study in order to understand the development of self-efficacy more profoundly.

Comparison of five popular normalization methods using a spike-in proteomics data set

Mass spectrometry (MS)-based proteomics has seen significant technical advances during the past two decades and mass spectrometry has become a central tool in many biosciences. Despite the popularity of MS-based methods, the handling of the systematic non-biological variation in the data remains a common problem. This biasing variation can result from several sources ranging from sample handling to differences caused by the instrumentation. Normalization is the procedure which aims to account for this biasing variation and make samples comparable. Many normalization methods commonly used in proteomics have been adapted from the DNA-microarray world. Studies comparing normalization methods with proteomics data sets using some variability measures exist. However, a more thorough comparison looking at the quantitative and qualitative differences of the performance of the different normalization methods and at their ability in preserving the true differential expression signal of proteins, is lacking. In this thesis, several popular and widely used normalization methods (the Linear regression normalization, Local regression normalization, Variance stabilizing normalization, Quantile-normalization, Median central tendency normalization and also variants of some of the forementioned methods), representing different strategies in normalization are being compared and evaluated with a benchmark spike-in proteomics data set. The normalization methods are evaluated in several ways. The performance of the normalization methods is evaluated qualitatively and quantitatively on a global scale and in pairwise comparisons of sample groups. In addition, it is investigated, whether performing the normalization globally on the whole data or pairwise for the comparison pairs examined, affects the performance of the normalization method in normalizing the data and preserving the true differential expression signal. In this thesis, both major and minor differences in the performance of the different normalization methods were found. Also, the way in which the normalization was performed (global normalization of the whole data or pairwise normalization of the comparison pair) affected the performance of some of the methods in pairwise comparisons. Differences among variants of the same methods were also observed.

To Integrate Or Not: A Comparison of the English Skills of Finnish Students in Mainstream Education and Content and Language Integrated Learning

The objective of the thesis was to study the possible linguistic differences of English of Finnish mainstream students and Finnish students following content and language integrated learning (CLIL), in terms of the given language test. The difference of test results between the test groups was further analyzed in more detail. The research was carried out by comparing the 9th grade students of the Finnish comprehensive school (the mainstream group) and CLIL students of the 9th grade of the Finnish comprehensive school (the CLIL group). The comparison was based on the national language test for the 9th grade students of the Finnish comprehensive school 2006 (A-English), produced by Sukol-Palvelu, owned by the Federation of Foreign Language Teachers in Finland SUKOL. The mainstream group of the present study consisted of 30 students, whereas the CLIL group included 27 students. Testing was carried out in spring 2007. The test results of the mainstream group (average of 64.1% out of the maximum score) were consistent with the results of the national average (63.9%). The average score of the CLIL students for the present study was 83.3% out of the maximum score. The results of the two groups in question were rather similar in the tasks measuring the skill of listening comprehension, in addition to one of the reading comprehension tasks. Moreover, a particular task with requirements of cultural and reactional skills produced results rather similar between the test groups. The differences between the results of the mainstream group and the CLIL group were most evident in three particular tasks. In general, the CLIL group performed clearly better than the mainstream group in the task measuring the knowledge of the polite conversational manners of the English-speaking world and in the tasks with requirements of lexical and structural knowledge of English. However, the writing task resulted in the most evident difference of results between the groups. In other words, the CLIL students of the present study were clearly more capable of producing English language with more varied vocabulary and more complex structures than the mainstream students. Thus, it might be argued whether the CLIL programme is to enhance the students´ performance in the productive skill of writing in particular. As a result, it might be useful to consider the possibilities of the CLIL programme in developing certain linguistic skills of the mainstream students of English as well.