English Education in Italy: Perceptions of Teachers and Professors of English
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines the growing impact of English in Italy and in the Italian education system. The analysis focuses on issues of educational policy and practice and addresses discrepancies that exist across these areas with regards to English proficiency and use among Italians. The first part of the paper examines English dominance in non-Anglo countries, the education system in Italy and foreign language policy initiatives of the European Union that impact language policy and practice in Italy. The second part of the paper reports on findings of a survey completed by high school teachers and professors of English as well as interview data on their perceptions on the role of English in the Italian education system and the society at large. While this study focuses on the situation in Italy, the results have resonance for other contexts in Europe and beyond. Cet article examine l’impact croissant de l’Anglais en Italie et dans le système éducatif italien. L’analyse se concentre sur les questions de politiques et pratiques éducatives et aborde les divergences existant à travers ces domaines, par rapport à la maîtrise de l’Anglais chez les Italiens et leur usage de la langue. La première partie de cet article examine la domination de l’Anglais dans les pays non anglophones, le système éducatif en Italie et les initiatives en manière de politique des langues étrangères de l’Union Européenne qui affectent les politiques et pratiques des langues en Italie. La seconde partie de ce document rapporte les résultats d’enquêtes complétées par des enseignants d’école secondaire et par des professeurs d’Anglais, de même que les données d’entretiens sur leurs perceptions du rôle de l’Anglais dans le système éducatif italien et dans la société en général. Bien que cette étude mette l’accent sur la situation en Italie, les résultats s’étendent aussi à d’autres contextes en Europe, et ailleurs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".