MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1935921405

The Effect of CALL on Iranian Beginner EFL Learners’ Grammar Learning

2013· article· en· W1935921405 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

VenueJournal of academic and applied studies · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrammarComputer scienceEnglish grammarMathematics educationCurriculumControl (management)Language acquisitionHomogeneousTest (biology)PsychologyArtificial intelligenceLinguisticsPedagogyMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using computer programs has recently caused language teaching and learning to undergo influential changes. Computer proved to be an instrument for those who are willing to learn a foreign language. It should be pointed out that CALL programs certainly have helped to educators to develop different types of learning which is based upon these technologies. Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL) is among those programs, which has caused this great change. The present study had a quasiexperimental design and involved quantitative data collection procedures. Participants were males and were selected from second grade students of a guidance school in Guilan. The purpose of the present research was to investigate the effect of CALL on improving beginner EFLs' grammar learning. To this aim, a multiple-choice test of grammar namely KET, of which the reliability was 0.79, was administered to 127 EFL beginners out of whom sixty-four of the students were selected as homogeneous and randomly divided into two groups of thirty-two participants. Assigned groups were the control group that were taught with traditional grammar learning methods and an experimental group who underwent the CALL instruction. The results of the study through a posttest revealed that the experimental group outperformed the control group. Therefore, CALL appeared to be useful in developing English grammar of the EFL students. The researcher concluded that integrating technology to curriculum is beneficial for beginners and that the application of computer and its related technologies can facilitate grammar learning both inside and outside the classroom.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.753
Threshold uncertainty score0.680

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.247 · 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