Literature Specialists Stating the Aims of Teaching Literature in the Iraqi University EFL Classes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Literature is employed in the curriculum of many departments of English in Iraq and other countries. This study investigates literature teachers’ statements of the aims of teaching literature in the Iraqi university English as a foreign language (henceforth EFL ) classes. This area, according to my humble knowledge, has not been fully investigated in Iraq. This study addresses the following questions: What are the various aims of using literature in the Iraqi university EFL classes? what are the areas of language and literature discussed by the teachers of literature? It is designed to state the aims of EFL teachers' use of literature in the Iraqi university EFL classes, and list those areas of language and literature, which can be taught by using literature. To answer those questions and to achieve those aims, literature teachers' attitudes regarding the aims of teaching of literature in the Iraqi university EFL classes are investigated by constructing a questionnaire by the researcher and exposing it to jury members and is then used as a data collection technique. In this study, it is hypothesized that the aims of teaching literature include various students' linguistic types of development, including the development of their language skills, of developing critical thinking, interpretations of literary texts, and of their personalities; and that the areas of literature upon which the aims of teaching literature are to be applied include poetry, drama and the novel. Depending on the analysis and discussion carried out in this study, the hypotheses are verified and the questions and aims of study are answered and achieved. It is concluded that the aims of teaching literature include developing the various students' linguistic, language skills, intellectual and aesthetic types of development, and of various types of interpretations of literary texts, and of their personality.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".