MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1602681676 · doi:10.5539/elt.v8n11p1

English Digital Dictionaries as Valuable Blended Learning Tools for Palestinian College Students

2015· article· en· W1602681676 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish Language Teaching · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLexicography and Language Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationGlobeReading (process)PsychologyTest (biology)Foreign languageThe artsComputer scienceLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>Digital technology has become an indispensible aspect of foreign language learning around the globe especially in the case of college students who are often required to finish extensive reading assignments within a limited time period. Such pressure calls for the use of efficient tools such as digital dictionaries to help them achieve their academic purposes. Efficient use of such tools, however, would not be possible unless students are familiar with their special features so as to use them to their maximum advantage. This paper investigates the extent to which Palestinian college students are familiar with the features and advantages of different dictionary types especially digital ones. It also probes the effect of using certain activities on the students' level of awareness and dictionary use. A structured interview and a test were applied on a group of 148 Arts and Science students at two local universities. The interview measured the purposes (skills) that these dictionaries are used for and the domains they are used in. At a later stage in the experiment, these students were involved in an eight week activity that required them to use an online dictionary on a daily basis to complete an assignment. After the experiment, it was found that the frequency of dictionary use declined in the case of the print dictionary and increased remarkably in the case of the electronic (CD-Rom) and online dictionaries. It was also found that exposing students to the authentic language available in electronic dictionaries notably enhanced the students' overall language proficiency.</p>

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.379
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.247 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it