Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many universities have instituted intensive English for Academic Purposes (EAP) programs to support international students. This qualitative study used interviews to gain insights into the experiences of 8 non-native English speaking (NNES) students who completed an EAP program before they enrolled in disciplinary courses at a Canadian university. We followed and interviewed these students as they studied in the EAP program and then moved through the first term of university to identify how the EAP program prepared them for disciplinary courses. Results of the study illustrate that students’ responses to the EAP program were mostly positive; all 8 students reported improvements and increased confidence in speaking and writing as they embarked on university classes. However, the participants reported challenges in their first term of university, including difficulty in understanding lectures, completing more complex writing tasks, adjusting to new expectations, and seeking social or peer support. The participants reported that all these challenges would have been greater had they not taken the EAP courses. Recommendations based on the findings are discussed.Plusieurs universités ont établi des programmes intensifs d’anglais académique pour appuyer les étudiants internationaux. Cette étude qualitative s’est basée sur des entrevues pour obtenir un aperçu des expériences de 8 étudiants n’ayant pas l’anglais comme langue maternelle qui ont complété un programme d’anglais académique avant de s’inscrire à des cours liés à une discipline académique dans une université canadienne. Nous avons suivi ces étudiants et les avons interviewés pendant qu’ils suivaient le programme d’anglais académique et ensuite lors de leur premier semestre d’université pour identifier dans quelle mesure le programme d’anglais académique les avait préparés pour les cours réguliers. Les résultats révèlent que les étudiants ont réagi de façon surtout positive au programme d’anglais académique; tous les 8 étudiants ont signalé des améliorations et une confiance accrue face à l’anglais oral et écrit quand ils avaient commencé leurs cours universitaires. Toutefois, les participants ont évoqué des défis pendant leur premier semestre à l’université, y compris de la difficulté liée à la compré- hension des cours, les tâches écrites plus complexes, l’ajustement aux nouvelles attentes et la recherche d’appui social ou des pairs. Les participants ont déclaré que ces défis auraient été encore plus importants sans les cours d’anglais académique qu’ils avaient suivis. Nous discutons de recommandations découlant des résultats.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.029 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".