MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3043173364 · doi:10.3968/11714

English for Diplomacy; Designing a Course for Spokesmen of Ministries in Regional Government/Iraqi Kurdistan

2020· article· en· W3043173364 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Momen Yaseen M. Amin

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in literature and language · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSecond Language Learning and Teaching
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSyllabusDiplomacyContext (archaeology)Government (linguistics)Political scienceForeign languageEnglish languageLanguage assessmentPedagogySociologyMathematics educationLinguisticsPsychologyPoliticsHistoryLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the design of a course of English for Academic Purposes (EAP) – English for Diplomacy for spokesmen of ministries in Iraqi Kurdistan, which English for them is foreign language not second and knowing this language is crucial. The development of the course and its transformation into the syllabus as English for Diplomacy reflects the changing demands of ministries of Kurdistan Regional Government and the growing interest in both ESP and public policy matters in this region. This project aims to identify the occupational English language needs of diplomats whose second language (L2) is not English and English for them is foreign language. It consists of two sections; First, i describe the context or situation that language program will be carried out (“environment analysis”). Then, explain and exemplify clearly the needs analysis, and states clearly the ideology/principles that reflect in this design, and plans of the goals and learning outcomes/objectives. In section two, attaches a sample unit/module with the teaching materials, exercises, etc., reflecting what was planned in Section one.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in literature and languageSame topicSecond Language Learning and TeachingFrench-language works237,207