MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388973303 · doi:10.54850/jrspelt.7.40.007

Investigating Cognitive Levels Applied to English as a Foreign Language Acquisition/Learning among Secondary School Learners in Parakou, Benin

2023· article· en· W4388973303 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hounnou Azoua Mathias

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal for Research Scholars and Professionals of English Language Teaching · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSecond Language Learning and Teaching
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyCognitionForeign languageLanguage acquisitionMathematics educationDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Students' cognitive levels play important roles in EFL classes.They determine lessons mastery by learners and also the teaching learning process achievement.This research has aimed to assessing the EFL students' different cognitive levels in Parakou municipality.Teachers and learners have participated to the study.They were selected through random way.Questionnaires, interviews, classroom observation and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) were used to collect data.The findings have demonstrated that 40% of the teachers met don't know anything about cognitive levels, 50% do not know which cognitive activities they should give to the students according to their levels.Only 30% are aware of that and are really boosting the students' cognition.Besides, 80% of the learners have a quick understanding and 20% have a low or medium understanding of the lessons taught.Cognitive levels in the teaching-learning process can help learners to better improve the four skills as well as their critical thinking.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.333 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal for Research Scholars and Professionals of English Language TeachingSame topicSecond Language Learning and TeachingFrench-language works237,207