The Relationship Between Instructor Feedback and ESL Student Anxiety
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This correlational study, conducted in intermediate English as a second language (ESL) high school classes in Quebec, investigated the relationship between in- structor feedback and student anxiety. The participants were 53 ESL students in their last year of secondary school who were required to take an integrative- writing exam as part of their graduation requirements. Throughout a 5-month pe- riod, students took 2 practice integrative-writing tests, received written corrective feedback, and completed 5 questionnaires about their language learning anxiety, L2 writing anxiety, and perceptions about instructor feedback. The results showed a significant negative correlation between students’ perceptions of feedback and test anxiety. The findings indicated that students with more positive perceptions of instructor feedback had lower anxiety.Cette étude corrélationnelle, qui a eu lieu dans des classes d’ALS au secondaire au Québec, a porté sur le rapport entre la rétroaction de la part de l’enseignant et l’anxiété chez les élèves. Les participants, 53 élèves d’ALS en secondaire 5, devaient passer un examen de synthèse portant sur la rédaction de sorte à répon- dre aux exigences d’obtention de leur diplôme. Au cours d’une période de 5 mois, les élèves ont écrit 2 examens de synthèse de pratique, ont reçu de la rétroaction corrective par écrit et ont complété cinq questionnaires portant, d’une part, sur leur anxiété face à l’apprentissage d’une langue et la rédaction en L2 et, d’autre part, sur leurs perceptions de la rétroaction par l’enseignant. Les résultats in- diquent que les élèves ayant des perceptions plus positives de la rétroaction de l’enseignant souffraient moins d’anxiété.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".