Students and Teachers’ Causal Attributions to Course Failure and Repetition in an ELT Undergraduate Program
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article is the product of a diagnostic research study conducted by two professors from the APRENAP research group at Universidad Surcolombiana from Neiva, Huila, Colombia. The study aimed at looking into the causes for the English courses repetition phenomenon which was evident among many students especially in the advanced semesters at the ELT undergraduate program in the university. The main purpose of this qualitative study that followed the Grounded Theory principles was to determine to which factors the academic community of the program- professors and students- attributed the constant failure and repetition of advanced English courses by some students. Findings gathered from the analysis of a questionnaire and a semi-structured interview evidenced that variables such as a lack of autonomous learning habits, economic, labor and family responsibilities, and few hours of class, among others, affect negatively students’ foreign language learning.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 it