MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2735568505 · doi:10.5539/elt.v10n8p107

Turkish High School Students’ English Demotivation and Their Seeking for Remotivation: A Mixed Method Research

2017· article· en· W2735568505 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Cenk Akay

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish Language Teaching · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurkishPsychologyAmotivationMathematics educationSample (material)Process (computing)PedagogyIntrinsic motivationSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since Gardner introduced the importance of motivation on Language 2 learning, the concept has been accompanied with three more relevant concepts; amotivation, demotivation and remotivation. This paper mainly focused on high school students’ de-motivation and remotivation in English. De-motivation is a set of factors which decreases the motivation level of the learners and re-motivation is an attempt to overcome those de-motivating factors. English learning-teaching process has been a problematic issue for a long time in Turkey. While there are researches focusing on the de-motivating factors in many countries, such a research for Turkish high school students has not been found. This research aimed to fill this research gap and to determine the English demotivation level of the students and the demotivating factors for them and to put forth suggestions to re-motivate the learners. An explanatory design was used as a mixed method research design. The sample was constituted of 579 students. Research results revealed that demotivation level of high school students in English is quite high, their motivation decreases most in high school period. Lack of interest in English, attitude of course teacher, classroom environment and course materials are among demotivating factors. In addition, the students request that, for remotivation, courses should be entertaining, technological tools should be utilized more and frequency of speaking activities should be increased.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.194
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations24
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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