MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220775057 · doi:10.5539/ells.v12n2p21

Business English Proficiency Acquisition Facilitated by Technology: Evaluations and Implications

2022· article· en· W4220775057 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xiaoer Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish Language and Literature Studies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology-Enhanced Education Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Competence (human resources)Computer sciencePerceptionMathematics educationLanguage acquisitionBusiness EnglishReading (process)Second-language acquisitionPsychologyKnowledge management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Online learning prospered in recent years, so did the research in this area. The COVID-19 pandemic has made it the default option of education. The design, implementation and evaluation of a completely online education model are of universal urgency. The learning purposes of Business English encompass the mastery of business knowledge and language abilities. This paper reviews the online teaching and learning of this course and tries to assess its effectiveness in equipping students with business related language competence. Students’ performances were measured in score comparisons; their levels of participation and activeness were captured in statistics across learning platforms; their perceptions on the advantages and disadvantages of this teaching model were collected in a survey and in-depth interviews. Research results show significant progresses have been achieved in students’ reading proficiency; language production in terms of speaking and writing was perceived to have been improved; the level of engagement was high. Challenges of this model have also been summarized and corresponding modifications would be proposed, to facilitate proficiency acquisition more efficiently.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.328 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnglish Language and Literature StudiesSame topicTechnology-Enhanced Education StudiesFrench-language works237,207