MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3058423327 · doi:10.1075/jslp.20026.fre

Long-term effects of intensive instruction on fluency, comprehensibility and accentedness

2020· article· en· W3058423327 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Second Language Pronunciation · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityUniversité TÉLUQ
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFluencyPsychologyPerceptionTerm (time)Cognitive psychologyMathematics education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We assessed the long-term effects of intensive instruction on different aspects of L2 oral production. Adopting the tridimensional model of oral production ( Munro & Derwing, 1995a ), we compared high school learners who had received intensive ESL instruction ( N = 42) with non-intensive learners ( N = 39) on perceptual measures of L2 fluency, comprehensibility, and accentedness 4 years after a 5-month intensive instruction period. After controlling for academic ability and L2 proficiency, listeners’ ratings of fluency and comprehensibility were significantly higher for the IG; however, there was no specific group advantage for accentedness, suggesting both groups exhibited similar L2 accents. This study provides new empirical evidence that the oral fluency and comprehensibility benefits of an intensive experience may be long lasting, even when learners’ subsequent classroom exposure to the language is much more limited.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.801
Threshold uncertainty score0.273

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.230 · 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