MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406317367 · doi:10.5430/wjel.v15n3p265

A Study on EFL Vocabulary Teaching for Non-English Major College Students in China Based on Multimodal Theory

2025· article· en· W4406317367 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xuanxuan Zhou, Nur Ainil Sulaiman, Hanita Hanim Ismail

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of English Language · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSecond Language Acquisition and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVocabularyClass (philosophy)Mathematics educationComputer scienceDiversification (marketing strategy)Vocabulary learningChinaEnglish as a foreign languageVocabulary developmentTeaching methodPsychologyArtificial intelligenceLinguisticsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the era of global diversification and technological advancement, the vocabulary teaching of teaching English as a Foreign Language (EFL) faces new challenges and opportunities. Multimodal theory-based teaching has gained significant attention in academic research. This study addresses the challenges in EFL vocabulary acquisition among non-English major students by employing the Explanatory Sequential Design (ESD). Initially, this study conducted a quantitative semi-structured questionnaire involving 78 non-English major college students in China. It identified key vocabulary learning issues, including monotonous vocabulary presentation content, limited vocabulary teaching methods and tedious vocabulary tasks. To address these challenges, this research implemented a research practice at Wenzhou Business College (WZBC) for one semester with 20 non-English major students, focusing on pre-class, in-class, and post-class stages. This study collected data to evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention and conducted a follow-up interview with 5 students to gain deeper insights. This study shows that applying multimodal theory in EFL vocabulary teaching enhances vocabulary acquisition by engaging students with varied content, interactive methods, and customised tasks that build confidence, thereby boosting interest and participation in vocabulary learning. These findings offer valuable insights for advancing EFL educational practices.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.333
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.319 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of English LanguageSame topicSecond Language Acquisition and LearningFrench-language works237,207