English Language Learning Beliefs of Jordanian Students: The Effect of Gender
Bibliographic record
Abstract
English language learning beliefs play a key role in the language learning process, especially among EFL (English as a foreign language) learners. This study seeks to clarify English learning beliefs among EFL students in Jordan, and to examine whether female and male learners differ in these beliefs. Horwitz’s (1987) Language Learning Beliefs Inventory (BALLI) was adapted to gather relevant data from 83 English major participants at a private university during regular classes. Frequency analysis and T-tests were then performed utilizing SPSS. The findings demonstrate that while Jordanian students are not sure about language difficulty, they are highly enthusiastic about learning the English language. Furthermore, female and male students only had significantly different results in two aspects of BALLI: 1) motivation and expectations and 2) difficulty of language learning. Hopefully, the results will provide constructive insights to lecturers concerning students’ beliefs about learning English, which will help improve the English-learning process in Jordanian universities.
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 | 0.001 | 0.036 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".