MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409477519 · doi:10.53103/cjlls.v4i6.186

Brainstorming to Develop EFL Writing Skills: Bangladeshi Secondary Level Students’ Perceptions

2024· article· en· W4409477519 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Language and Literature Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Critical Thinking Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrainstormingPsychologyPerceptionMathematics educationPedagogyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Writing is a fundamental skill that is taught in schools and the idea of brainstorming is intertwined with writing.The study aims at investigating the perceptions of secondary level students of Bangladesh on brainstorming to develop their writing skills in EFL classroom.This study employed a mixed-method approach to gather data from the students, utilizing both qualitative and quantitative methods.To ensure comprehensive data collection, a questionnaire was utilized, comprising a combination of open-ended and close-ended items.This study reveals the positive perceptions of students.The findings highlight how brainstorming contributed to developing various aspects of writing.Educators can leverage these findings to implement brainstorming in their EFL writing class.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.290
Threshold uncertainty score0.934

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.339 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Language and Literature StudiesSame topicEducation and Critical Thinking DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207