MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2780079771 · doi:10.5430/wjel.v7n4p1

The Effect of Classroom Environment on Achievement in English as a Foreign Language (EFL): A Case Study of Secondary School Students in Gezira State: Sudan

2017· article· en· W2780079771 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Abdul-Majeed Attayib Umar

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of English Language · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Environments and Student Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsViewpointsMathematics educationForeign languageEnglish as a foreign languagePsychologyLearning environmentControl (management)English languageAcademic achievementSpace (punctuation)Descriptive statisticsPedagogyComputer scienceMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Classroom environment plays a significant role in determining students’ level of academic achievement and enhancingtheir holistic growth. For students, the classroom is not just an intellectual space, but also a social, emotional andphysical environment. The purpose of this study is to examine the effects of classroom environment on learningEnglish as a foreign language by a group of first grade students at Secondary Schools in Gezira State in the Sudan. Thisstudy indorses the experimental approach to realize its objective. Two groups of students are classified as theExperimental and the Control group and assigned to study under two different classroom environments. TheExperimental group consists of (122) students. These are accommodated in three well renovated classrooms; while theControl group which includes (135) students are assigned to study in non-renovated schools under relatively poorclassroom environments. The two groups are taught the same English language material by teachers with similarqualifications and experiences during the first term of the academic 2016. Scores in the English Final Examination forthe two groups are compared to check the classroom environment effect on the students’ achievement. These scores aretabulated and analysed using descriptive statistics. The results reveal that there are significant differences between theachievements of the Experimental and the Control group in English in favour of the Experimental group who havestudied under favourable classroom conditions. The researcher has also explored the administrators’ and teachers’viewpoints regarding the learning environment in the study zone and its possible impact on students’ achievement inEnglish. The study ends up with some recommendations including conducting further studies on the environmentaleffect on other school subjects and on female students’ achievement.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.315 · 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

Citations15
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of English LanguageSame topicEducational Environments and Student OutcomesFrench-language works237,207