MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2587966370 · doi:10.5539/elt.v10n3p128

A Questionnaire-based Study on Chinese University Students’ Demotivation to Learn English

2017· article· en· W2587966370 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chili Li, Ting Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish Language Teaching · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHubei UniversityHubei University of Technology
KeywordsPsychologyMathematics educationCompetence (human resources)CurriculumCommunicative competenceEmpirical researchEnglish as a foreign languagePedagogyProcess (computing)Class (philosophy)QuestionnaireForeign languageCollege EnglishSociologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper, adopting questionnaire survey method, investigated 367 non-key local university English as a Foreign Language (EFL) students’ demotivation to learn English. The collected data revealed that there were two main categories of demotivators: internal factors (lack of intrinsic interest, experience of failure and lack of confidence, and unclear study goal) and external factors (teaching material, teaching process and teaching content, significant others, teachers’ teaching competence and attitude of teachers, the relationship between teachers and students, teaching facilities and teaching environment). External factors are found to be more influential than internal ones in the participants’ demotivation to learn English. The current study adds to the literature in that unclear study goal is an important demotivator in Chinese local non-key university EFL students’ English study. The findings of this study will enrich the research of demotivation to learn English, and to provide an empirical basis for the needs analysis in English class and curriculum reform, as well as to provide reference for implementing central and local education policies.

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)0.003
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations23
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnglish Language TeachingSame topicEFL/ESL Teaching and LearningFrench-language works237,207