MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794428932 · doi:10.5539/elt.v11n3p40

The Effect of EFL Teachers’ Training in Rural West China: Evidence From Phonics-oriented Program

2018· article· en· W2794428932 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yeqin Kang, Lijuan Liang

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish Language Teaching · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMOE Research Center for Online EducationMinistry of Education, IndiaFord Foundation
KeywordsPhonicsPsychologyCurriculumChinaChristian ministryMathematics educationTeacher educationProfessional developmentPerceptionPedagogyMedical educationPrimary educationPolitical scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

China has launched a nation-wide project of learning English as a “core” subject starting from the third grade in primary schools after the Ministry of Education (MOE) issued National English Curriculum Standards for Compulsory Education at the beginning of this century. However, EFL teachers are far from sufficient in rural schools, and thus students are in a more disadvantageous position compared to their peers in the urban area. To meet this need, many Zhuangang teachers are employed after being trained. This study examined a phonics-oriented training program in which scholars and practitioners cooperated to train EFL teachers and prospective trainers in rural west China. The current study collected data about EFL teachers’ perceptions on the effect of this program and student achievement. The results showed that the training program was quite effective with EFL teachers regarding the program as helpful and students obtaining significantly better scores. These findings indicate that phonics-oriented professional support system is a good way to make teacher development sustainable in the long run.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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