MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4389868715 · doi:10.5539/elt.v17n1p13

Towards a Comprehensive Framework of Motivation to Learn: a Validation Study

2023· article· en· W4389868715 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ruth Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish Language Teaching · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGoal theoryPsychologySelf-determination theoryMotivation to learnContext (archaeology)Intrinsic motivationCognitive evaluation theoryConstruct (python library)Foreign languageMotivation theoryMathematics educationSocial psychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Motivation has been an important construct in second language acquisition and received extensive attention on how it affects learning and performance. The aims of this current review paper are multifaceted. 1) It aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the major motivation theories in the past decades. 2) Motivation theories specific to second/foreign learning context are to be included and explain the current state of the different domains of motivation theories. 3) It provides a critical evaluation of the rich body of motivation theories. 4) it also gives directions to propose a framework for motivation to learn a second/foreign language based on the major theories and approaches developed in the past. With this proposed comprehensive framework for motivation to learn a second/foreign language, it is hoped that a fuller picture of how different aspects and factors can be of significance to a learner’s motivation to learn. For educators, this framework can shed light on the pathways to effective teaching and learning by understanding what affects a learner’s motivation to learn English. For researchers, this paper would like to offer a future research direction for effectuation, validation, and modification of this proposed comprehensive framework.

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)0.054
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.065
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.286

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0540.065
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 venueEnglish Language Teaching→Same topicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning→French-language works237,207→