MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2471871952 · doi:10.5539/ijel.v6n4p190

The Effect of Corpus-Based Language Teaching on Iranian EFL Learners’ Vocabulary Learning and Retention

2016· article· en· W2471871952 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

VenueInternational Journal of English Linguistics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSecond Language Acquisition and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVocabularySignificant differenceGrammarPsychologyVocabulary learningControl (management)Mathematics educationComputer scienceRetention rateLinguisticsArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>The use of corpora in second/foreign language (ESL/EFL) classes has established to be a valuable tool in teaching grammar, vocabulary and natural language use. The corpus-based approach to language teaching and linguistics has gained its prominence since the mid-1980s. However, there has been little research on investigating the corpus-based tasks openly in the classroom. The current research attempts to examine the effect of corpus-based teaching on EFL learners’ vocabulary learning and retention of Iranian EFL learners. Forty pre university Iranian female students at Saei high school in Gorgan, aged 18 participated in this study. The number of participants in each group was 20. After administering the pretest, students in the experimental group were taught using corpus-based approach while students in the control group were taught using traditional methods. After instruction, a posttest was administrated to both groups. After two weeks of the first posttest, the second posttest was administrated to both groups to see the effect of corpus-based teaching on vocabulary retention (immediate retention). The design of the study was quasi-experimental, as there was no random selection. T-tests were employed to analyze the collected data from the vocabulary tests including pretest and posttests. The results of the study indicated a significant difference between the experimental and control group in favor of corpus-based vocabulary teaching. The result also showed that corpus-based teaching has a significant effect on EFL students’ vocabulary retention and the effect did not fade away over time. This study has some pedagogical implications which can bring fruitful results for language teachers and learners and material developers.</p>

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)0.050
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.918
Threshold uncertainty score0.958

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.050
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.301 · 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