MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4291108851 · doi:10.5430/wjel.v12n6p286

Difficulties in Speaking English among the EFL students in Iraqi Kurdistan Region

2022· article· en· W4291108851 on OpenAlex
Zanyar Nathir Ghafar, Momen Yaseen M. Amin

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of English Language · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSecond Language Learning and Teaching
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnthusiasmPsychologyVocabularyFirst languageInterpersonal communicationCurriculumForeign languageAtmosphere (unit)Mathematics educationPedagogyLinguisticsSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Speaking is a measure of linguistic ability and a fluent speaker is considered as a skilled language learner. In Kurdistan Region of Iraq -KRI, English is taught as a foreign language from elementary to university. However, Kurdish students, even university students, have challenges with speaking English and show their attitudes to speaking as one of the complex skills in language learning. This paper revealed that most learners have personal, linguistic, social, and environmental speaking challegnes. Lack of confidence, insufficient vocabulary, reluctance, nervousness while speaking, fear of making errors, lack of an appropriate setting to practice English, and lack of instructor enthusiasm were major problems of Kurdish students. This study looked at students' speech problems and their reasons. The researchers collected data from 12 second-year students in the National Institute of Technology, in sulaimaniyah city, as an example by adopting a semi-structured interview. The data were collected and analyzed in two significant categories: difficulties and reasons, with three subgroups. The research focused on psychological, social, environmental, interpersonal, and linguistic issues as challaenges of speaking difficulty, instructor and instruction, core curriculum, misuse of mother tongue, insufficient education, and classroom culture as causes of speaking inadequacy. The researchers recommend the development of a positive atmosphere, promoting knowledge acquisition, modifying teaching approaches, and rewriting courses.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.103
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.228 · 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