MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2401438398 · doi:10.5539/ijel.v6n3p176

Types of Recasts (Full and Partial) and Grammatical Structures by Basic Level EFL Iranian Learners

2016· article· en· W2401438398 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ali Elhami, Anita Roshan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of English Linguistics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSimple (philosophy)Test (biology)Mathematics educationLinguisticsPsychologyFunction (biology)MathematicsComputer sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study was designed to show if the full and partial recast given to third person “s” or simple past “ed” caused learners to generate various kinds of output. 32 EFL learners at the elementary level participated in the current research. They were divided in two different groups, one included 18 and the other 14 learners. After recording their voice while giving them full and partial recast, regarding data analysis, chi Square and Paired-Samples t-test were run to analyze the data. The hypothesis was retained, leading us to conclude that full and partial recast did not function differently in simple past “ed” and the third person “s”. In doing so, it aims to help teachers to better understand the effectiveness of full recast and partial recast in different grammatical structures.

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)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of English Linguistics→Same topicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning→French-language works237,207→