MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

How can Chinese English teachers meet the challenge of creating a learner-centered, communicative, intercultural classroom to achieve optimal student learning outcomes?

2010· article· en· W1694467444 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ying Song

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian social science · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPedagogyContext (archaeology)PsychologyEnlightenmentHumanitiesSociologyArtPhilosophyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Effective reforms on English education in China are necessary and essential. Concepts of western English education, such as learner-centered, communicative, or intercultural bring both enlightenment and confusion to Chinese English teachers. However, the adoption of these concepts must be done based on Chinese its own English teaching and learning context. Key words: learner-centered; communicative language teaching; intercultural; task based Resume: Des reformes efficaces de l'enseignement de l'anglais en Chine sont necessaires et essentiels. Des concepts de l'enseignement de l’anglais cccidentaux, par exemple un enseignement centre sur l'apprenant, communicatif, ou interculturel, rendent les professeurs chinois d’anglais a la fois eclaire et confus. Toutefois, l'adoption de ces concepts doivraient etre realisee en fonction du contexte propre de l’enseignement et de l’apprentissage en Chine. Mots-cles: centre sur l’apprenant; enseignement de langue communicatif; interculturel, basee sur le travail

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.289
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations12
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian social scienceSame topicEFL/ESL Teaching and LearningFrench-language works237,207