MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W16845893 · doi:10.1139/y05-154

A Study on Students’ Strategies To Reduce Anxiety In Speaking Class On Second Semester Students Of English Education Program At IAIN Tulungagung Academic Year 2013/2014

2014· article· en· W16845893 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yusuf Mohammad

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Methods and Media Use
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnxietyWorryPsychologyFeelingClass (philosophy)Communication apprehensionMathematics educationPedagogySocial psychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Keywords: Anxiety, Students’ Anxiety, Causes Anxiety, Reduce Anxiety, Speaking Class \nLearning English is very important, because English has became an international language, which is used by most communities in the world. Many countries use English as their second language. English lessonserves as a meansof self-developmentof studentsin science, especially speaking as one of the English skill that must be concerned by whole learner in communication. Speaking ability is the main part in communication, but sometimes students have an anxiety which impedes their ability to perform successfully in foreign language class. Anxiety is the subjective feeling of tension, apprehension, nervousness, and worry associated with an arousal of autonomic nervous system. Concerning to this problem, the students needs to strategies to reducing anxiety in speaking English and teacher needs to help students’ anxiety about learning English especially in speaking as easy as possible.The strategies that the students use very useful to reduce anxiety in speaking class. Some students have suggested a variety of strategies to successfully in reducing students’ anxiety. \nThe formulation of the research problems is: 1) what are the causes of the students’ anxiety and 2) how the students’ anticipate to reduce their anxiety in speaking class. \nThe purpose of this study were: 1) To know the causes of students’ anxiety in speaking class, 2) To know the students’ anticipates to reduce their anxiety in speaking class. \nThe research method: 1) the research design in this study was qualitative approach and case study. 2) The subject of this study was second semester students of class 2 C who consisting of 30 students, but the researcher took only 4 of them to collect the data by ways choose students. 3) The data was got by distributing observation and interview. \nThe result showed that the causes of students’ anxiety is shown as follows: there are two factors. They are personal factors and interpersonal factors. The first personal factors means personality. such as feeling ashamed and fear if making mistake, lack of self-confidence if in front of class with what that said, feeling nervous to express opinion in front of classmates, less in speaking’ knowledge, \nfear if vocabulary and arrange grammar is wrong, cant’ speaking English correctly, less of mastering vocabulary, mistake in speaking English sentence and words, feel worried when know that will take an English speaking test and also fear of mind the blank when mistakes. The second interpersonal factors means between two or more people. such as direct correction from lecturer if wrong in speaking, feeling her friends have high ability than him, fear of laughed by classmates when making mistakes, forget the answer while speaking English if her friends and lecturer keep looking at her and difficult in understanding with clearly what lecturer said or lecturer speaks not clearly/fast. \nStudents’ strategies to reduce anxiety in speaking class applying the strategies; trying to say what is coming to them mind, looking for a similar word that has meaning. keeping on trying to say and stay calm, just concentrate to finish them presentation, trying to make jokes and insert funny story, to assume that all the friends also feel the same way, to believe in themselves that they can absolutely do it and beat her fear, a little memorizing vocabulary for the preparation of talk, speaking for themselves at home as training, trying to hear and stay calm when lecturers explains material, ask them friends and lecturer when not understand, do every task of the lecturers as much as possible, trying to find synonym of the word, and preparing as much as possible what they’ll say

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.365 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Physiology and PharmacologySame topicEducational Methods and Media UseFrench-language works237,207