MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2357002108 · doi:10.5430/jct.v5n1p87

Needs Analysis of Saudi EFL Female Students: A Case Study of Qassim University

2016· article· en· W2357002108 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Huda Sulieman Alqunayeer, Sadia Zamir

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Curriculum and Teaching · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSyllabusActive listeningNeeds analysisCurriculumPreferenceMathematics educationReading (process)PsychologyMedical educationPedagogyMedicineLinguisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research study analyzes the target needs of EFL female Saudi students to choose EFL as their specialization.The population of the research is the female students enrolled in Bachelors in English program, at the Department ofEnglish Language and Translation, Qassim University Saudi Arabia. Adapting the Hutchinson And Waters model ofNeeds Analysis, the study covers the Target needs( i.e. Necessities, Lacks and Wants) and the Learning needs. Itaims to suggest certain amendments in the curriculum on the basis of needs analysis. The sample for study consistedof 150 students, the data was collected through questionnaire and analyzed by using SPSS. Overall assessment of thedata shows that the learners show their weakness in oral skills i.e. Listening and Speaking as compared to literaryskills i.e. Reading and Writing. Students have shown their preference for the incorporation of practical activities andmedia based teaching material in their syllabus.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations23
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Curriculum and TeachingSame topicEFL/ESL Teaching and LearningFrench-language works237,207