Out-of-class Language Learning (OCLL): A Case Study of a Visually-Impaired EFL Learner
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is an increasing concern on how to meet the needs of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners with visual impairments. Existing literature has explored how visually-impaired EFL learners participate in learning activities within the formal classroom. However, there is a lack of research examining their out-of-class language learning (OCLL) activities. Therefore, anchored on Benson's (2011) concept of OCLL, a qualitative case study was conducted to investigate the OCLL behaviors of a proficient visually impaired EFL learner. Through personal interviews and journal writings, the study identified three primary stages of OCLL activities that the participant went through: the initial exposure to English, the early production of English, and the development of communication skills. The study revealed that the participant transitioned from passive to active learning by effectively exploring the locus of control and combining a physical and online learning environment. Additionally, the social dimension, encompassing peer interaction and support, helped the participant in optimizing their learning outcomes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".