Computers in the Grade 9 FSL classroom : how do they influence students' attitudes, motivation, self-concept and performance?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study compared the attitudes, motivation, self-concept and performance of two Grade 9 Core French (FSL) classes in Ontario. One class of 16 students used computer mediated communication (CMC) for approximately 1.5 hours per week. The other class of 24 students did not use computers. Analysis of covariance showed no statistically significant differences on any quantitative measures of attitude, motivation, self-concept or performance. The analysis of student interview responses and teacher observations revealed no significant between-group differences on these four variables either. The results suggest that computers are not better than traditional communicative methods of second language teaching in developing Grade 9 FSL students' attitudes, motivation, self-concept and performance. Since the teacher was the variable common to both classes, however, her influence may explain the undifferentiated between-group results. Regardless of the methods used to teach students, the teacher may always be the most influential variable in determining students' attitudes, motivation, self-concept and performance.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".