An Empirical Research on Application of Cohesion Theory in College Listening EFL Teaching
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cohesion Theory of Halliday and Hasan has been widely applied in different subjects of College EFL teaching, particularly in reading comprehension, writing and translation practice. It can also be a practical theory for College Listening EFL Teaching. Based on that theory, an empirical research is carried out among the freshmen from two classes in Yangtze University College of Arts and Sciences, and it lasts for 16 weeks. One of the classes is Control Group (CG) and the other is Experimental Group (EG). Both groups have the same amount of exercises from the same teaching materials but with different guidance in class: the subjects in CG are taught in traditional ways while those in EG are trained with the guidance of Cohesion Theory. After the experimental teaching period, the data collected from students’ pre-test and post-test scores is analyzed by the SPSS software program. The pre-test results show that there is no statistically significant difference between the scores of EG and CG before the experiment (P= 0.932>0.05). While the post-test results demonstrate that there is a considerable improvement on the scores of the subjects in EG than that of CG (P=0.009 < 0.05).
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".