MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3001708338 · doi:10.5539/ijel.v10n1p424

Determining the Effectiveness of the Process Genre Approach in Increasing and Decreasing Saudi EFL University Students’ Complexity, Accuracy, and Fluency in Reaction Essays

2020· article· en· W3001708338 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Talal Musaed Alghizzi, Tahani Munahi Alshahrani

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of English Linguistics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDiscourse Analysis in Language Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFluencyConstruct (python library)Wilcoxon signed-rank testTest (biology)PsychologySophisticationMathematics educationConstruct validityLinguisticsComputer scienceCurriculumPedagogySociologySocial scienceDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the level of effectiveness that the process genre approach has on increasing and decreasing Saudi advanced EFL undergraduates’ Complexity, Accuracy, and Fluency (CAF) in reaction writing. Sixteen level six participants were recruited from the College of Languages and Translation at Al-Imam Muhammad Ibn Saud Islamic University. All participants undertook a pre-test and a post-test on reaction writing. After collecting 32 essays, they were analyzed based on 55 indices of CAF, and then a Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test was applied to compare each CAF construct/sub-construct measure’s mean in the pre-test with its mean in the post-test, and between the total mean of all measures for each CAF construct/sub-construct in the pre-test with their total means in the post-test. The findings showed that there were no significant total or partial impacts of the process genre approach on participants’ reaction essay syntactic complexity, lexical density, lexical sophistication, and fluency. However, the results indicated that there were only partial effects of the approach (across some measures) on participants’ reaction essay lexical variation and accuracy. Finally, the study yields several pedagogical implications and recommendations for EFL writing instructors, educators, and researchers.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.983

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.266 · 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.

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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of English LinguisticsSame topicDiscourse Analysis in Language StudiesFrench-language works237,207