This mixed-methods study examines how fourth-year English majors at Thu Dau Mot University engage in Zalo-based classroom discussions. Using a convergent parallel design, data were collected through a questionnaire (N = 112) and semi-structured interviews (N = 8) to explore behavioral, cognitive, and emotional dimensions of engagement. Findings reveal that Zalo is primarily used for task coordination and passive monitoring, with limited proactive discussion. Students value its functions for planning and language accuracy but perceive discussions as low in intellectual depth. Emotionally, Zalo fosters social connection and comfort in interacting with peers and lecturers but also introduces pressure to keep up and reluctance to express dissent. The study highlights Zalo’s dual role as a facilitator of convenience and a constraint on deeper learning, suggesting the need for intentional instructional design to promote critical thinking and inclusive dialogue.

Undergraduate research is widely recognized as a meaningful practice that develops students’ critical thinking, problem‑solving, and science identity, yet student engagement remains uneven due to multiple factors. To address this issue, this mixed-methods study examines undergraduate students’ engagement in research at a Vietnamese university, focusing on their attitudes, perceived support, and intentions to participate. Survey data (N = 164) and interviews (N = 8) reveal a clear divide between students’ positive views of research outcomes and their ambivalence toward the research process. Although students believe lecturers are supportive, they report low comfort in seeking help, limited peer encouragement, and little awareness of institutional research policies. Students express moderate intention to conduct a research project but show strong reluctance toward presenting or publishing their work. The qualitative findings highlight psychological barriers, unclear pathways, and an outcome-oriented mindset. The study argues that current support structures are passive and insufficient. Institutions should implement more visible, structured mentorship to strengthen students’ confidence and foster a more active undergraduate research culture.