The Effect of Schema-Vs-Translation-Based Instruction on Persian Medical Students’ Learning of General English
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explored the effect of employing two language teaching approaches, i.e., schema-based instruction (SBI) and translation-based instruction (TBI) on the structure and vocabulary knowledge as well as reading comprehension ability of sixty undergraduate students studying general English in a medical school in Mashhad, Iran. While the SBI approaches the words/phrases comprising texts as schemata having syntactic, semantic and discoursal relationships with each other, the latter considers offering their translation equivalents as the only necessary and sufficient condition to understand texts. After being divided into two groups, the learners in the experimental and control groups were taught via SBI and the TBI, respectively. The administration of a 120-item schema-based cloze multiple choice item test (SBCMCIT) developed on the syllabus and administered as a pretest at the beginning of the term showed that the two groups were homogenous. The administration of an unseen final examination (UFE) consisting of structure, vocabulary and reading comprehension subscales at the end of the term showed that the learners taught via the SBI performed significantly better than those taught via the TBI not only on the UFE and its subscales but also on the SBCMCIT administered as a post test. The findings are discussed within the specified language components and abilities.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".