MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3008178177 · doi:10.5430/jct.v9n1p55

Improving Learners’ Oral Proficiency in French Through the Communicative Approach: Colleges of Education in Oyo in Focus

2020· article· en· W3008178177 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Balogun Thomas Akanbi, Kezie-Osuagwu Clementina Ndidi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Curriculum and Teaching · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActive listeningForeign languageFirst languageCommunicative language teachingMathematics educationPsychologyReading (process)PedagogyLanguage educationMedical educationLinguisticsMedicineCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It cannot be overemphasised that French language is a foreign language in Nigeria and that its teaching and learning cannot take the same process as acquiring/learning the mother tongue or a second language. Foreign language learning requires some strategic applications in order to be able to interact with the native speakers in real life day to day communication. This study aims at delving into some teaching strategies involving the communicative approach to teaching French as a foreign language in order to boost the oral proficiency of our learners in French. The teachers and students in two colleges of Education namely Federal College of Education (Special) [FCES] and Emmanuel Alayande College of Education (EACOED), both located in Oyo town, were the participants in the study. Data were collected through classroom observation, students’ achievement test as well as questionnaires for teachers. The results indicated that students perform better when the teachers employ the communicative approach. Based on the findings of this study, it is therefore recommended that teachers of French language use the communicative language teaching approach to build confidence in their students as this will help to develop faster their linguistic skills, given that this approach gives priority to listening and speaking skills over reading and writing skills.

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)0.000
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 score0.188
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations6
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Curriculum and TeachingSame topicEFL/ESL Teaching and LearningFrench-language works237,207