Improving English Comprehension in Primary School by Picture-books Story-telling and Reading
Bibliographic record
Abstract
So many Chinese students graduated from university after having learned English for 12 years, but they can’t use English well, especially in English listening and speaking. However, all these college students passed Band 4 test of CET (College English Test). There are many reasons for this strange phenomenon but the most important one is Chinese teaching system which is badly influenced by testing system. This year (2013), Chinese education department are under discuss whether the English test will be taken out of National Examinations of College Entrance or the total score should cut down from 150 to 100. It has reflected that our country is in a dilemma whether we should take English into NCEE (National College Entrance Examinations) or not. However, the problem is not exams but how to test and how to teach English in schools. As a primary school teacher for 16 years, the writer has found out that all teachers have to use a textbook to teach and have to finish the textbook and take exams according to the book. If students do better in exams, teachers’ value will improve. Otherwise, they will not be welcomed by school headmaster. These really hold back our English teaching. All our teachers are thinking about how to help students achieve high score not language function, that, understanding and communication. After many years teaching, the writer has found out that English learning goes well with exams. In order to prove this, the writer began an experiment which lasted for 10 weeks during which the writer read picture-books to students at every class for ten minutes. The students really enjoyed the stories. This method really enhances students’ interests and abilities in listening, speaking and understanding. This article focuses on the picture-books reading to improve the comprehension of English reading in primary school. Reading picture-books improve students’ comprehension and teachers’ teaching approaches. It will benefit all the students if this teaching method applies to all students who are learning English. As no one in China has done this research before, the writer thinks this article can apply to many primary schools in China.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".