MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391533868 · doi:10.5430/wjel.v14n2p410

Voices Unheard: Enhancing English-Speaking Skills among Technical Learners at Industrial Training Institute by Implementing Task-Based Language Teaching

2024· article· en· W4391533868 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
E. Kiruthiga, G. Christopher

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of English Language · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Learning Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTask (project management)Computer scienceTraining (meteorology)Mathematics educationNatural language processingPsychologyEngineeringSystems engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ITIs offer practical training in various technical trades, which enables students to enter the workforce faster than other traditional degrees. However, graduates from ITIs often need better communication skills to advance in their careers, leading to stagnant pay scales. To tackle this issue, a study was conducted to improve English-speaking skills among ITI students by implementing a task-based language teaching approach. A true experimental design was used for this study. The sample consisted of 76 ITI students who were randomly assigned to two groups: control (n=38) and experimental (n=38). Technical learners were given ample opportunities to practice their English-speaking skills and receive instructors feedback. The study showed significant improvement in the student’s ability to communicate professionally. This study suggests that incorporating task-based language teaching into the ITI curriculum can significantly benefit students by enhancing their employment prospects and potential for career growth. Since the allocated tasks replicate the practical training, technical learners perceive them as readily achievable.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.782
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.330 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of English LanguageSame topicHigher Education Learning PracticesFrench-language works237,207