The Relationship between Ideal L2 Self and Willingness to Communicate Inside the Classroom
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the past decades there has been a dramatic increase in academic research on motivation to learn a second or foreign language (L2). The present study tried to investigate the relationship between the ideal L2 self as a motivational variable and willingness to communicate in English (L2 WTC) inside the classroom. Participants were 56 university students majoring in English as a foreign language (EFL) at a private university in Ankara, Turkey. Data were collected using the Ideal L2 Self Scale and Willingness to Communicate inside the Classroom Scale. Findings of descriptive statistics indicated that 32.1% of the participants had high L2 WTC inside the classroom, 30.4% had moderate L2 WTC inside the classroom, and 37.5% had low L2 WTC inside the classroom. Findings also revealed a significant relationship between these two constructs noticing the relations at a skills specific level. The implications are discussed to present ideas to language teachers, teacher trainers, and curriculum designers to raise their awareness on the impact of ideal L2 self on willingness to communicate.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".