Case Study of Factors Affecting Chinese Students' English Communication Performance/ETUDES SUR LES FACTEURS AFFECTANT LE NIVEAU D'ANGLAIS DES ÉTUDIANTS CHINOIS PERFORMANCE DE COMMUNICATION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: For ESL teaching in China's universities, not enough emphasis is put on verbal communication as a yardstick of language mastery and methodological success. Developing student's communication competence is not only concerned with the nature of language from linguistic perspectives, but also could be influenced by such exogenous factors as environment, psychology, and strategies. It is necessary to investigate whether these factors have an impact on Chinese university students' English communication performance. This paper tries to examine the relationships among social needs, system inefficiencies, objectives, strategies, and effort, according to a constructed model. The model's hypotheses are drawn from theories as diverse as person-environment (PE) fit (Caplan, 1987), intrinsic motivation (Ryan and Deci, 2000), conceptions about approach (Entwistle, 1990), and learning strategy (Biggs, Kember, & Leung, 2001). The sample was collected from one of the Chinese universities in Southeast for a case study to shed light on how to improve English teaching and in TESL of China. The quantitative research method is used with SPSS system in this essay to report the statistical analyses of the model. Among the eight hypotheses tested, six were confirmed to be true, and two could not be validated. Key words: communication performance; 5-factor model; person-environment (PE) fit; intrinsic motivation; strategies Resume: Dans les universites chinoises ou l'anglais est enseigne comme la deuxieme langue, l'accent n'est pas suffisamment mis sur la communication verbale en tant qu'un critere de maitrise de la langue et du succes methodologique. Le developpement de la competence communicative des eleves n'est pas seulement concerne par la nature de l'apprentissage des langues du point de vue linguistique, mais pourrait aussi etre influence par des facteurs exogenes comme l'environnement d'apprentissage, la psychologie de l'apprentissage et les strategies d'apprentissage. Il est necessaire d'examiner si ces facteurs ont une influence sur la performance de communication en anglais des etudiants chinois. Le present document tente d'etudier les relations entre les besoins sociaux, l'inefficacite du systeme, les objectifs d'apprentissage, les strategies d'apprentissage et des efforts, selon un modele construit. L'hypothese du modele vient de diverses theories, telles que la theorie de l'adaptation peronne-environnement-(PE) (Caplan, 1 987), la motivation intrinseque (Ryan et Deci, 2000), les conceptions sur rapproche de l'apprentissage ( Entwistle, 1990), et les strategies d'apprentissage (Biggs, Kember, & Leung, 2001). Les sujets d'etudes viennent de l'une des universites chinoises situees dans le Sud-est pour montrer la facon d'ameliorer l'enseignement et l'apprentissage de l'anglais en tant que la deuxieme langue en Chine. La methode de recherche quantitative est utilisee avec le systeme de SPSS dans cet essai pour montrer des analyses statistiques du modele. Parmi les huit hypotheses testees, six ont ete confirmees d'etre vraies et deux n'ont pas pu etre validees. Mots-Cles: performance de communication; modele de 5-facteurs; le modele de l'adaptation personne-environment(PE); motivation intrinseque; strategies d'apprentissage 1. INTRODUCTION ESL teaching was introduced into China's higher education more than 20 years ago. The syllabus of Education Ministry elaborates the teaching goals and requirements for college and university students (Chinese Ministry of Education, 1999). According to this syllabus, and as Feng (2003) notes, the emphasis in the teaching process should gradually move from skills training at the sentence level towards communicative training at the discourse level. Yet, most university students do not perform as well in English communication as they are supposed to do. The focus seems to be more on reading and taking exams than on speaking and writing, which detracts from the basic goal of a foreign language. …
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".