MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2562163848

The Influence of Gender and Culture on First and Second Language Writing of Chinese and Japanese-speaking University Students

2011· dissertation· en· W2562163848 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Fu Jing

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace (University of Toronto) · 2011
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLinguisticsPsychologySociologyGender studiesPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated the influence of gender and culture on 23 university students’ first language (L1) and second language writing (L2). Specifically, the study investigated the extent to which gender differences would emerge in students’ L1 and L2 writing and whether any such differences would manifest themselves differentially in L1 as opposed to L2 writing. \n\tStudents represented three national groups (8 Japanese students, 7 Chinese students, and 8 Taiwanese students). The Japanese and Chinese groups received their schooling in their home countries and came to Canada for purposes of university studies. However, the Taiwanese group came to Canada during their schooling years and consequently their English academic skills were better developed than their Chinese skills. L1 and L2 writing was sampled with four different writing tasks and analyzed for patterns of lexical and rhetorical usage. Stimulated-recall interviews were conducted with each student after they had completed the four writing tasks. The goal of the interviews was to identify the metacognitive strategies the students utilized in their L1 and L2 writing. Issues related to how students’ identities intersected with their L1 and L2 writing were also explored.\nBecause the national groups are heterogeneous with respect to L1 and L2 writing experience, each group was considered as a separate case study for purposes of analysis. Exploratory cross-group analyses were carried out only to throw additional light on within-group trends. In the sample as a whole, statistical differences related to gender did not emerge. However, qualitative analysis of students’ L1 writing showed a distinct gender difference within the Japanese group. Specifically, Japanese females used considerably more politeness markers in their Japanese writing in comparison to Japanese males whose L1 writing tended to be more assertive. These differences were not apparent in males’ and females’ L2 (English) writing. No gender differences were observed in either L1 or L2 among the Chinese and Taiwanese groups. The findings suggest that learners absorb the instruction they receive in relation to effective ways of writing in their L2 environments and are fully capable of adjusting lexical and rhetorical features from L1 norms to L2 norms. The fact that female Japanese students did not generalize the politeness features they used in Japanese to English suggests that student identities are fluid and shift according to the cultural and linguistic context.

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)0.007
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace (University of Toronto)Same topicEFL/ESL Teaching and LearningFrench-language works237,207