MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055521657 · doi:10.5539/elt.v5n8p164

Pictures Speak Louder than Words in ESP, Too!

2012· article· en· W2055521657 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Seyyed Mahdi Erfani

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish Language Teaching · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicVisual and Cognitive Learning Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSyllabusPsychologyReading comprehensionContext (archaeology)Significant differenceComprehensionMathematics educationReading (process)Test (biology)PedagogyLinguisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While integrating visual features can be among the most important characteristics of English language textbooks, reviewing the current locally-produced English for Specific Purposes (ESP) ones reveals that they lack such a feature. Enjoying a rich theoretical background including Paivio’s dual coding theory as well as Sert’s educational semiotics, this research was done to investigate the probable effectiveness of using pictorial context in ESP reading comprehension ability of Iranian university students whose syllabus mostly focuses on this skill. To do so, this study was conducted on two groups of Iranian students majoring physics. Before the treatment, pretest was performed in both groups. The students in the experimental group were taught through passages furnished with different kinds of pictures while the ones in the control group were taught through the same passages without the pictorial context. At the end of the treatment which took twenty two sessions of two hours during twelve weeks, the posttest was administered to both groups. At the end, drawing on t-test at the significance level of 0.05, the students’ performance was compared. The results revealed that there was a significant difference between the mean score of the two groups. Thus, it was concluded that using pictorial context improves the ESP reading comprehension of students.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.006

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.324 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnglish Language TeachingSame topicVisual and Cognitive Learning ProcessesFrench-language works237,207