Perspectives on Introversion and Engagement in the Adult ESL Classroom
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adult learners who display introverted tendencies in formal English as a Second Language (ESL) learning environments are a heterogeneous group whose unique needs have gone relatively unexplored in the field of education. Research indicates that ESL instructional strategies typically viewed as “best practices” in North America may not always be the best fit for adult learners who display introverted tendencies. In this qualitative study, the author used semi-structured interviews and reflective journals to explore the stories of introversion and engagement of 11 adult ESL learners drawn from two educational institutions in Alberta. Interview questions included definitions of introversion, effects of introversion on learning English, barriers faced in the ESL classroom, and strategies for overcoming these barriers. After coding and categorizing individual interviews, and compiling and synthesizing information from all data sources, analysis and interpretation of findings were organized into three themes: 1) complex, multiple perspectives of identity, 2) sources of learners’ struggles, and 3) meeting learners’ needs. Findings indicated that there are diverse understandings of the term introversion based on cultural contexts, and that adult ESL learners demonstrate engagement in a number of ways that do not always align to traditionally accepted instructional practices within North America. The author concludes that introversion is complex, multidimensional, and changeable and offers an alternative framework for understanding the multi-faceted topic of introversion. Recommendations for instructors, instructional/curriculum designers, and adult ESL learners are aimed at creating more inclusive classrooms through the avoidance of labeling. The study could impact the way educators engage with learners who display introverted tendencies in formal, adult education learning contexts by providing additional context regarding barriers faced by such learners as well as strategies for assisting with their unique learning needs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".