MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2785327121 · doi:10.3138/cmlr.3906

Learner Variables Important for Success in L2 Listening Comprehension in French Immersion Classrooms

2018· article· en· W2785327121 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Larry Vandergrift, Susan Baker

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Modern Language Review/ La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActive listeningVocabularyListening comprehensionPsychologyMetacognitionComprehensionSecond languageVocabulary developmentFirst languageForeign languageCognitive psychologyLinguisticsMathematics educationTeaching methodCognitionCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Listening comprehension, which is relatively straightforward for native language (L1) speakers, is often frustrating for second language (L2) learners. Listening comprehension is important to L2 acquisition, but little is known about the variables that influence the development of L2 listening skills. The goal of this study was to determine which learner variables play a significant role in predicting L2 listening success among Grade 4 middle immersion students (N = 84). The variables of interest in this study were L1 and L2 vocabulary knowledge, auditory ability, working memory, and metacognition. Results showed that all the variables, except for metacognition, were significantly related to L2 listening comprehension. Regression analysis revealed that vocabulary knowledge, particularly L2 vocabulary, significantly predicts L2 listening success. The results are discussed in relation to their pedagogical implications for beginner learners of French.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.868
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations58
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Modern Language Review/ La Revue canadienne des langues vivantesSame topicEFL/ESL Teaching and LearningFrench-language works237,207