An Investigation into the Attitudes and Perceptions of Non-English Major Undergraduate Students and Their Teachers in Six Chinese Universities Towards the Development of Speaking Skills and Implications of the Findings for the Classroom
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation aims to examine the perspectives of non-English major students and their teachers towards the development of speaking skills in six Chinese universities. The study begins with a detailed literature review of the features of effective speaking. Then, Chinese L2 learners’ difficulties in learning English, specifically with regard to developing speaking skills, are discussed. Based on the difficulties identified, methods for improving speaking skills, including both teaching strategies and actual classroom activities are suggested. A survey is conducted by using questionnaires and interviews. To ensure maximum representation of their respective groups, 100 non-English major students and 4 English teachers with differing academic levels, based at six Chinese universities (China Youth University for Political Sciences, North China Electric Power University, Tianjin University of Finance & Economics, Henan University, Shandong University, Northeastern University) were selected from different geographic regions. In addition, the interviews with student participants are analyzed objectively in order to check whether their perceptions of their English proficiency match reality. Data is analyzed and recommendations on how to develop speaking skills for non-English major students will be made. The major findings of the study are briefly summarized as follows: the students and teachers who participated in the survey hold positive attitudes towards the teaching of speaking skills; teachers and students both had unrealistic expectations of their counter parts; although the students did not recognize it, pronunciation is a key cause of students’ problems with spoken English. To some extent, it is necessary to teach spoken grammar because it can affect fluency; Listening materials can be an effective resource, which can contribute to teaching speaking skills; Many other recommendations about how to develop speaking skills can be found in the discussion.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".