MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321099595 · doi:10.5539/elt.v16n3p1

To What Extent are Japanese University Students Successful in Motivating Themselves to Learn English through Project-based Language Education? An Assessment of Students after Two Years of PBL-based English Language Education

2023· article· en· W4321099595 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chiho Toyoshima, Tsukasa Yamanaka, Kohei Sugiyama

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish Language Teaching · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicStudent Assessment and Feedback
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyMathematics educationCurriculumPerspective (graphical)Intrinsic motivationLanguage proficiencyGoal theorySelf-determination theoryMotivation to learnPedagogyEnglish languageLanguage acquisitionSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of project-based learning (PBL) methods in teaching English at the Japanese university level from the perspective of motivational research. The case study focuses on the Project-based English Program (PEP) at a large private university in Japan, examining whether the program not only enhances English proficiency, but also motivates students to a higher level of self-determination. By analyzing these outcomes, this paper discusses the added value of PBL-based English education in terms of its effectiveness in motivating students. The analysis reveals that PEP has improved the English proficiency of the participants over the two-year curriculum, and that in terms of motivation, PEP has been successful to some extent in cultivating identified regulation, a relatively high level of self-determination among extrinsic motivation for English language learning. The results also indicate that the group tended to develop intrinsic motivation, a motivation with an even higher level of self-determination, suggesting that PBL-style classes are effective in facilitating the acquisition of high self-determined motivation. However, the results for stimulation, one aspect of intrinsic motivation, tended to show almost no acquisition, and the results for introjected regulation, an extrinsic motivation, were also scattered, suggesting that learners may retain some hesitation, conflict, and stress according to motivation theory. These findings can be utilized to improve educational programs in the future.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.223
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.382 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnglish Language TeachingSame topicStudent Assessment and FeedbackFrench-language works237,207