MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415383339 · doi:10.5430/wjel.v16n2p159

Navigating Challenges and Solutions in English as a Second Language Speaking Instruction: Insights from the Teachers’ Perspectives

2025· article· W4415383339 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
P Nallamuthu., Gandhimathi S.N.S

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of English Language · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSecond Language Learning and Teaching
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSituatedTamilPerceptionFocus (optics)CourageLanguage acquisitionLanguage educationSecond languageLanguage pedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Speaking skills play a significant role in language learning, and they support learners by engaging effectively in academic, professional, and social interactions. It is necessary for language teachers to help learners participate efficiently in various academic and social contexts. The perceptions of teachers are influential in deciding effective techniques for teaching speaking skills, as they impact the learning environment and learners' language improvement directly. The main objective of this study is to examine the perspectives of English as a Second Language (ESL) schoolteachers in teaching speaking skills. The current study employed a survey method to collect information on the skills needed for language teachers, the factors that influence the learners' speaking skills, and information regarding teachers who teach speaking skills. A total of 72 English school teachers across the state of Tamil Nadu, situated in India, participated in this study. Although teachers use interactive and student-centered methods in the language classroom, they often rely on conventional teaching methods to address the lack of motivation, confidence, and courage among the learners. The findings of this study revealed that the reduction of psychological barriers and the development of self-esteem among language learners should be the prime focus of ESL teachers. Teachers can create holistic and supportive learning environments that address linguistic and psychological barriers by implementing psychological and therapeutic modalities.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.007
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.256
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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 venueWorld Journal of English LanguageSame topicSecond Language Learning and TeachingFrench-language works237,207