A Study on Reducing the Sleeping in Class Phenomenon in Japanese Universities through Student Motivation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sleeping in class is a common phenomenon among students in Japanese universities. There are several possible reasons for this: tiredness from daily routines such as commuting, difficulty concentrating in 90-minute classes, or a lack of motivation to study. As for English as a foreign language (EFL) classes, it is possible that university students are not as motivated as high school students, considering that English education in Japan is generally aimed at preparing students for university entrance examinations. The main purpose of this study is, therefore, to examine ways to prevent students from sleeping in class by improving their motivation. Based on the results of questionnaire surveys and focus group interviews, this study seeks to identify ways in which student attention and alertness in class can be improved. The participants in this study were asked to take a vocabulary test before completing exercises in their textbook. After four weeks, follow-up research was conducted using questionnaires and semi-structured interviews. The study results showed that taking a vocabulary test at the beginning of class is an effective method of motivating students, but that motivation alone cannot prevent university students from sleeping in class.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".