Yemeni EFL Learners’ Identity Conflicts: An Exploratory Case Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The importance of the concept of “identity” in the context of language learning is unassailable. Stemming from this premise, the current study is intended to explore the identity conflicts of a group of Yemeni learners who were studying English, as well as the techniques and strategies used to mitigate and/or lessen the conflicts between their actual identity and the identity associated with the target language, i.e., English. This research project used a qualitative exploratory case study research design with a sample of 20 students who were requested to write their journal diaries. Following that, semi-structured interviews were conducted using the double-sampling technique to select 10 of the previously sampled students who were proven to have written the most stimulating and intriguing journal entries. From the results of the study, tangible identity conflicts between the Yemeni culture and society at large and the implied behaviors and conventions accompanying the intensive study of the English language became apparent. The students exhibit a high level of motivation and they also exert their efforts using different techniques and strategies to excel at the learning and/or acquisition of the speaking skill of the English language. These conflicts may be consciously or subconsciously realized by the language learners, but what has been proven is that their attitudes, motivation and general inclinations towards the goal of speaking with a native or a native-like accent are unquestionably genuine. Lastly, the study suggested or recommended a revamp of the current textbooks giving teachers more training sessions in order to improve their individual repertoire, as well as a higher degree of awareness upon the part of the Yemeni society at large that these conflicts can interfere with the strong motivations, both aspirational and actual, to achieve the learning outcomes of the nation’s most promising future leaders and pioneers.
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 | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".