MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411398530 · doi:10.1515/ijsl-2024-0117

English in Uzbekistan: language ideologies and teaching practices

2025· article· en· W4411398530 on OpenAlexaff
Dilia Hasanova, Nargiza Vokhidova

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of the Sociology of Language · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSecond Language Learning and Teaching
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdeologyContext (archaeology)SociologyPedagogyMultilingualismPolitical scienceEnglish languagePoliticsMathematics educationPsychologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study examines the evolving role of English in Uzbekistan’s educational institutions within the context of recent educational reforms initiated by President Mirziyoyev to modernize the education system and create a “competitive state” where multilingualism, including English proficiency, is prioritized. The research explores the instrumental functions of English in the aftermath of these reforms and employs theories of language ideologies (LI) to analyze Uzbek EFL teachers’ perceptions of English. Additionally, it investigates how these ideologies influence teaching methodologies and classroom practices. To address the research questions, the study draws on multiple primary data sources, including interviews and observational notes. The findings highlight that the presidential reforms, alongside initiatives by the US Embassy and the British Council, are key drivers promoting the spread of English within Uzbekistan’s educational landscape. Data analysis reveals that these reforms have significantly influenced and reshaped EFL teachers’ language ideologies. Teachers reported adopting pedagogical methods and strategies aimed at preparing students to thrive in a globalized world.

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)0.003
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 score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score0.350

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.305 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of the Sociology of LanguageSame topicSecond Language Learning and TeachingFrench-language works237,207