MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3201249807 · doi:10.5539/elt.v14n10p35

Text-Relevant Video Segments and Reading Comprehension of Culturally Unfamiliar Texts with Adult Speakers of English as a Second Language (ESL)

2021· article· en· W3201249807 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Amirreza Karami, Freddie A. Bowles

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish Language Teaching · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicReading and Literacy Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Arkansas
KeywordsReading comprehensionPsychologyReading (process)ComprehensionLinguisticsSchematic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This pilot study is a mixed-methods sequential explanatory study that investigated the effects of watching text-relevant video segments supported by the Schematic Information-Processing (SIP) model of reading comprehension on reading comprehension of adult speakers of English as a Second Language (ESL) in terms of text familiarity and the retention of the content of a culturally unfamiliar text. Twenty homogeneous participants were randomly assigned to two groups: one control group and one experimental group. The results of the quantitative analysis showed that the experimental group outperformed the control group in both the immediate and delayed post-tests. Qualitative findings also highlight the effectiveness of implementing text-relevant video segments supported by the SIP model over traditional text-based reading instruction in terms of reading comprehension and retention of the content of the culturally unfamiliar passage. Limitations of the study and suggestions for future research are discussed in detail.

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)0.006
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnglish Language Teaching→Same topicReading and Literacy Development→French-language works237,207→