MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1639616325 · doi:10.5539/res.v7n11p213

What Are the Barriers in the Use of Computer Technology in EFL Instruction?

2015· article· en· W1639616325 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Abbas Pourhosein Gilakjani, Narjes Banou Sabouri, Asieh Zabihniaemran

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of European Studies · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender and Technology in Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer technologyInformation technologyComputer-Assisted InstructionSoftwareComputer scienceTechnology integrationComputer ApplicationsMathematics educationPsychologyEducational technologyMultimediaPublic relations

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A lot of teachers have serious problems in the effective use of computer technology. There are many barriers facing EFL teachers to use computer technology in their instruction. This paper reviews some of the important barriers toward using computer technology in EFL instruction. They are availability of hardware and software, lack of computer knowledge, lack of computer experience, inadequate computer technology support, time factor, teacher attitudes, and lack of professional development in computer technology integration. A review of these barriers will indicate how they influence the teaching and learning processes and what could be done to urge EFL teachers to use computer technology in their instruction.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.164
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of European StudiesSame topicGender and Technology in EducationFrench-language works237,207