An Analysis of English Language Ability of Employees at Saung Angklung Udjo Bandung. \nKania Perdani Putri: 157010032
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Language is a very important thing for us to master because language is a tool for communicating with people throughout the world. Many languages throughout the world, one of them is English. English has been recognized worldwide as a second language or International language. Moreover, English is also one of the official languages in various countries such as South Africa, Belize, the Philippines, Hong Kong, Ireland, Canada, Nigeria, Singapore. Therefore, it is very important for us as Indonesians to understand English even though it is not our mother tongue. According to Brown (2001: 232) there are four skills in English, namely; Listening, Speaking, Reading, and Writing. In this study, researcher focused on 2 skills in English, they are; listening, and speaking. Speaking is a productive skill. It could not be separated from listening. When we speak we produce the text and it should be meaningful. In the nature of communication, we can find the speaker, the listener, the message and the feedback.Speaking could not be separated from pronounciation as it encourages learners to learn the English sounds.The title of this research is An Analysis of English Language Ability of Employees at Saung Angklung Udjo Bandung. This research was intended to find out how is the employees English language ability in 2 aspects there are, Listening and Speaking. This research is to knowtheir English language skills as workers in a Tourist Attraction that is often visited by tourists from abroad and to serve foreignguests.This research alsoto find out where the level of English proficiency they have.According to CEFR (Common European Framework of Reference for Languages) there are 6 levels to know how high is our level in speaking English. The levels are; Beginner (A1), Elementary (A2), Intermediate (B1), Upper-Intermediate (B2), Advanced (C1), Proficient (C2). As the conclusion, when the data have been collected, the researcher proposes to make the results of this research become a new idea. This research will use qualitative methods to answer and obtain conclusions.Based on the background, the research questions of the problem in this study is to know what are the levels of English Proficiency of Saung Angklung Udjo’s Employees based on the CEFR.The results of the CEFR Test conducted by each employee got results between Beginner and Intermediate. From the results of this research, the researcher proposed to cooperate with the management of Saung Angklung Udjo in order to add 1 new requirement in recruiting new employees. The condition is that the requirement to be an employee in the Front Office position (GRO/Guest Relation Officer) that face directly to the guest should have a minimum level of English that is Intermediate. It should beintermediates required, because as can be seen in Chapter 2 about the indications of each level, the Intermediate level has a very solid indication and is suitable for an employee working in the tourism world who meets a lot of foreign guests.Keywords: English Language Ability, CEFR, Front Office Employee.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".