MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403934412 · doi:10.1075/jslp.22026.zha

Language teacher self-efficacy beliefs for pronunciation instruction

2024· article· en· W4403934412 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Second Language Pronunciation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPronunciationPsychologyMathematics educationSelf-efficacyComputer scienceLinguisticsSocial psychologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Studies on language teachers’ self-efficacy (LTSE) have gained attention in recent years; however, limited research has explored LTSE in specific domains of language instruction, particularly pronunciation. The present study employs a domain-specific survey to measure English as a second language (ESL) teachers’ self-efficacy in pronunciation instruction (PI) in Canadian classrooms. Data from the survey and follow-up interviews were analyzed to explore ESL teachers’ overall self-efficacy beliefs, relationships with language, and pronunciation proficiencies. The findings reveal that ESL teachers in Canada generally report high levels of self-efficacy for teaching pronunciation. While the correlation between general language proficiency and self-efficacy was not significant, the correlation between their pronunciation proficiency and self-efficacy for teaching pronunciation was significant, even though it falls below the benchmark for small effect size.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.853
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.247 · 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