MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285798729 · doi:10.5430/wjel.v12n6p166

The Impact of EFL Teachers’ Emotional Intelligence and Teacher-Related Variables on Self-Reported EFL Teaching Practices

2022· article· en· W4285798729 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anas Awwad

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of English Language · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotional Intelligence and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCreativityPsychologyEmotional intelligenceCornerstoneClassroom managementMathematics educationTeaching englishPedagogyDevelopmental psychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Teacher emotions form a cornerstone of classroom teaching practices. The study investigated the impact of EFL teachers’ traits emotional intelligence, teaching qualifications, teaching experience, teaching stage, gender and age on their self-reported classroom teaching practices. An online survey was administered to 115 EFL teachers. The findings confirmed a significant positive correlation between emotional intelligence and classroom teaching practices. Teaching experience was found to influence classroom management and pedagogical skills, but not teacher creativity and teacher predictability, which was in favour of the most experienced teachers. Teaching qualifications affected creativity, classroom management and pedagogical skills which was in favour of PhD holders. No effects were detected for teaching stage, age or gender on EFL teachers’ classroom teaching practices. The findings are discussed in line with the previous relevant research and the related theories.

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)0.002
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 score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.360
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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of English LanguageSame topicEmotional Intelligence and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207