MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3042769528 · doi:10.5539/ijel.v10n5p190

The Prominent Barriers to Speaking in English: A Study Conducted Among Youngsters

2020· article· en· W3042769528 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Aby John

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of English Linguistics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEnglish Language Learning and Teaching
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClass (philosophy)PsychologyEnglish languageFace (sociological concept)Business EnglishMode (computer interface)Mathematics educationPersonalityComputer scienceLinguisticsSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This discourse analyses the prominent barriers to speaking in English while conducting online English Language classes during the pandemic, COVID-19. The study is conducted among business communication students in university colleges in India and takes five paradigms into consideration. They are: the motivational factor, the personality of the learner, attitude of the learner, the pedagogical management of English classes in online mode and the level of exposure to the English language. Data were collected by analyzing the survey questionnaire distributed among 150 business communication students. Data were analyzed with the help of SPSS in a descriptive mode. The result of the analysis shows that while dealing with online classes, teachers face several difficulties to manage the language subjects, especially the pedagogical management of the English subject. Another significant factor is the level of exposure to the English language. In this online system, ordinary students do not have an opportunity to communicate and practice English. They show some kind of hesitation to use English during the entire class time and give less attention to the words of the teacher. Most of them are distracted due to several factors. It contributes moderately to the predicaments of the learners. This study also helps to understand the crucial factors that act as language barriers in cross cultural business communication as the application level of language is more or less same all over the world.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of English LinguisticsSame topicEnglish Language Learning and TeachingFrench-language works237,207