MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Study on English Vocabulary Learning Strategies for Non-English Majors in Independent College

2011· article· en· W1841161959 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

VenueCross-cultural communication · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSecond Language Acquisition and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesVocabularyVocabulary learningEnglish languagePsychologyLinguisticsArtMathematics educationPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper has investigated the pattern of English vocabulary learning strategies used by the non-English major students in Chinese Independent Colleges: their attitudes to vocabulary learning; the strategies they usually use; the problems of vocabulary learning in English study; the most effective vocabulary learning strategies they assume; differences among the students with different grades, genders, English proficiency and so on. The survey has been done on the non-English majors from grade 1 to 3 in Beihai College of Beihang University. The aim of the paper is to help English learners to improve their ability of vocabulary learning and develop their English proficiency by providing some practical suggestions to both teachers and learners.Key words: Vocabulary learning strategies; Non-English majors; Suggestions Resume: Cet article a etudie les modeles des strategies de l'apprentissage de vocabulaire anglais utilises par les etudiants qui ne sont pas dans la specialite de langue anglaise dans les universites independantes chinoises: leurs attitudes a l'apprentissage du vocabulaire, les strategies qu'ils utilisent habituellement, les problemes de l'apprentissage du vocabulaire dans l'etude de l'anglais, les strategies de l'apprentissage du vocabulaire les plus efficaces qu'ils assument, les differences chez les etudiants ayant des qualites differentes, des sexes differents, des niveaux de la maitrise de l'anglais differents et ainsi de suite. Le sondage a ete effectue sur les etudiants qui ne sont pas dans la specialite de langue anglaise de la 1ere annee a la 3eme annee a Beihai College de l'universite de Beihang. L'objectif de ce document est d'aider les apprenants en anglais aameliorer leur capacite d'apprentissage du vocabulaire et de developper leurs competences en anglais en fournissant des suggestions pratiques aux enseignants et aux apprenants.Mots-cles: strategies d'apprentissage du vocabulaire; specialite non-anglophones; suggestions

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.332
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.318 · 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