MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2887692029 · doi:10.5539/elt.v11n9p118

The Project-Based Flipped Learning Model in Business English Translation Course: Learning, Teaching and Assessment

2018· article· en· W2887692029 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lijun Deng

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish Language Teaching · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovative Teaching Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationFlipped classroomSummative assessmentClass (philosophy)Competence (human resources)PsychologyBlended learningBusiness EnglishCollege EnglishPedagogyComputer scienceEducational technologyFormative assessmentArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study designs a project-based flipped learning model for Business English Translation course and tests its efficacy by an empirical study on 65 third-year English major students divided into the experimental class and control class. This study incorporates the learning, teaching and assessment activities of both the students and teachers into a project-based flipped learning model by setting translation projects and dividing the students of the experimental class into a client group and three translator groups in each business translation unit. After one 16-week semester of experiment, this study conducts a post-test, questionnaires and interviews on both the experimental class and control class to test the efficacy of this new flipped learning model. The statistics and facts collected from the above-mentioned research methods suggest that the project-based flipped learning model can significantly enhance the students’ motivation to learn out of class, stimulate their participation in class and raise their self-evaluation on translation competence. Additionally, this study finds that the traditional product-oriented summative assessment model is ineffective for Business English Translation course in a flipped-learning context. Therefore, this study tentatively proposes a process-oriented assessment model that is compatible to the flipped learning methodology so as to build integrated flipped classroom pedagogy with teaching, learning and assessment in a virtuous circle of mutual reinforcing.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.365 · 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

Citations34
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnglish Language TeachingSame topicInnovative Teaching MethodsFrench-language works237,207