MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990464942 · doi:10.3968/11280

Readability Assessment of Business English Textbooks

2019· article· en· W2990464942 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wenling Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in literature and language · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSecond Language Acquisition and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReadabilityComputer scienceReading (process)Business EnglishHierarchyCurriculumMathematics educationLinguisticsPsychologyPedagogyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Business English: An Integrated Course published in 2010 is the first series of textbook compiled in accordance with the National Teaching Curriculum for BA Program in Business English of China . This paper uses Flesch Reading Ease to conduct a readability assessment of its textual difficulty. The quantitative analysis indicates that there is room for improvement: 1) the four books in the series lack a scientific hierarchy of readability, 2) the readability in the same book covers an unreasonably wide range, 3) some texts are too difficult. These defects prove the important role readability can play in the compilation of business English textbooks. This research is hoped to shed light on the use of readability assessment in the compilation, revision and evaluation of business English textbooks.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.352 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in literature and languageSame topicSecond Language Acquisition and LearningFrench-language works237,207