MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3040488034 · doi:10.5430/wje.v10n3p160

Applying the Silent Way in Teaching Japanese Language to University Students in Taiwan

2020· article· en· W3040488034 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Abolfazl Shirban Sasi, Toshinari Haga, Heng Yu Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Education · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHearing Impairment and Communication
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVocabularyTest (biology)PsychologySignificant differenceMathematics educationJapanese languageMann–Whitney U testLinguisticsMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study investigated the feasibility of applying the Silent Way in teaching Japanese to Taiwanese university students. A total of 168 (96 female and 72 male) students in a university in central Taiwan were the subjects of this study. They were studying Japanese as a general course, and were grouped in five classes ranging from freshmen to juniors. Some basic principles and techniques of the Silent Way were adopted in teaching them some vocabulary and 50 Japanese Hiragana sounds during six successive sessions in three weeks. Each administration took about 20 minutes embedded in the normal class time. A 25-item Hiragana sounds oral test was used as the pre-test and post-test in order to examine the effects of applying this method. Using a paired sample T-test (α ≤.05) significant difference between students’ knowledge of the Japanese sounds before and after the experiment was observed. However, comparing female and male students’ gained scores via applying a Mann Whitney U-test, no significant difference was observed. Thus, this study shows that the Silent Way can be used in teaching Japanese sounds and vocabulary, and that the effects for both females and males seem to be the same.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.287
Threshold uncertainty score0.150

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of EducationSame topicHearing Impairment and CommunicationFrench-language works237,207