MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2992480578 · doi:10.3968/11311

Study on Teachers’ Discourse in College English Class

2019· article· en· W2992480578 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xinxin Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueCross-cultural communication · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDiscourse Analysis in Language Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClass (philosophy)Mathematics educationQuality (philosophy)College EnglishPedagogyEnglish languageDiscourse analysisPsychologySociologyComputer scienceLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Teachers’ discourse plays an important role in teachers’ class management and students’ language acquisition. It is not only the source of the target language, but also the means of class organization. Whether the teachers’ discourse can be properly used is directly related to the quality of teaching effect. Based on the audio records of 6 college English teachers and their interviews in teaching and research activities, the author makes a research on the amount of teachers’ discourse, the way of questioning, the language adjustment, the way of feedback as well as a detailed investigation and analysis of the teachers’ use of their native language in order to preliminarily explore the use of college English teachers’ discourse in class.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.217
Threshold uncertainty score0.671

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCross-cultural communicationSame topicDiscourse Analysis in Language StudiesFrench-language works237,207