Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is close relationship between language and culture. Language reflects culture and it is influenced and shaped by culture at the same time. Consequently, teaching English is inseparable from teaching its culture. Cultural awareness or tolerance is of great importance in English teaching and learning. It contributes to effectiveness and appropriateness of an English discourse. Only with the communication of language competence and cultural awareness can a language learner be successful in communication. To achieve this goal, the article develops closely around how to foster students’ cross-cultural awareness in EFL teaching. Key words: cross-cultural awareness; EFL teaching; cultural differencesResume: Il y a des liens etroits entre la langue et la culture. La langue reflete la culture et elle est influencee et faconnee par la culture en meme temps. Par consequent, l’enseignement de l'anglais est inseparable de l'enseignement de la culture anglaise. La sensibilisation a la culture ou la tolerance est de grande importance dans l’enseignement et dans l'apprentissage de l'anglais. Elle contribue a l'efficacite et a la pertinence d'un discours en anglais. Un apprenant de langue ne peut reussir dans la communication qu’avec des competences linguistiques et la sensibilisation. Pour atteindre cet objectif, l'article se developpe autour de la facon de favoriser la sensibilisation interculturelle des eleves dans l'enseignement EFL.Mots-Cles: sensibilisation interculturelle; enseignement EFL; differences culturelles
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".