Japanese EFL Learners’ Perspectives on the Inclusion of Diverse English Accents in Audio Recordings for Textbooks and Listening Tests
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The use of English accents beyond standard American and British varieties has been increasingly advocated in English language education, particularly in listening instruction and assessment. However, little is known about learners’ perspectives on diverse accents in terms of their use in different types of listening materials. This mixed‐methods study examined the attitudes of 161 Japanese learners of English as a foreign language (EFL) toward incorporating diverse English accents into textbook listening activities and listening assessments. Quantitative data were collected through Likert‐scale items on accent preferences and beliefs about how accents affect test performance, while qualitative data came from open‐ended responses for deeper insights. While participants generally supported the inclusion of diverse accents in listening activities, they expressed hesitation about the use of accents in assessments, citing concerns about increased anxiety and its impact on test performance and emphasizing the emotional and cognitive challenges associated with high‐stakes testing. Qualitative analysis highlighted pedagogical benefits of diverse accents, such as fostering real‐world communication skills and enhancing accent familiarity. These findings highlight the need for stepwise inclusion of diverse accents in listening materials while addressing learners’ concerns. Practical recommendations include refining assessment design for fairness and developing inclusive resources that reflect global English use.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it