MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2729685819 · doi:10.5430/wjel.v7n2p39

Fifty Years of the Evolution of Listening Comprehension Skill across Different Pedagogical Perspectives in EFL and ESL Contexts: A Theoretical Review

2017· review· en· W2729685819 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hamid Reza Babaee Bormanaki

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of English Language · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActive listeningPhenomenonListening comprehensionForeign languageComprehensionLanguage acquisitionPsychologyInformational listeningAppreciative listeningLinguisticsMathematics educationCognitive psychologyEpistemologyCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chronologically speaking, the view to listening skill has been changed over the decades of development of the phenomenon of second and foreign language learning and teaching, as we go through the language centered methods to learner centered methods and to learning centered methods. In this sense, as we go through the years of the development of this phenomenon, we can see as the methodology and its underlying assumptions and theories has been changed, the view to listening has also been changed. Building on these assumptions, the purpose of the paper is first to review the importance of the listening in different educational and societal settings that has lead to different patterns taken place in the approaches to listening over the past decades. It will then describe how these approaches have provided the basis for listening in different types of pedagogical perspectives as in language-centered methods, learner-centered methods, and learning centered methods. Finally, it will show how this skill has been viewed and encapsulated in socio-cultural and interactionists’ accounts of the 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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of English LanguageSame topicEFL/ESL Teaching and LearningFrench-language works237,207