MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7115173711 · doi:10.5539/elt.v19n1p16

Technology-Supported Curriculum-Based Measurement for Vocabulary Development in ESP: A Case Study in Marketing Education

2025· article· W7115173711 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish Language Teaching · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldPsychology
TopicSecond Language Acquisition and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVocabularyVocabulary developmentFormative assessmentRelevance (law)Delphi methodEnglish vocabularyEnglish for specific purposesWord lists by frequency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study we investigate the development and instructional application of a curriculum-based English vocabulary list tailored for marketing majors at a technological university in Taiwan. Combining corpus linguistics and curriculum-based measurement (CBM), we aimed to address the lexical challenges that low-proficiency learners in English for Specific Purposes contexts (ESP) face. We constructed a specialised corpus from open-access marketing textbooks and web-based content. We selected the Marketing Word List (MWL), comprising 208 high-frequency domain-specific terms, through frequency analysis and expert validation using the Delphi method. We subsequently integrated these terms into an online learning platform that delivered bilingual instructional materials, self-paced quizzes and weekly formative assessments. A two-month intervention showed a statistically significant improvement in students’ vocabulary performance. Preliminary evidence suggested that the MWL enhanced domain-specific vocabulary acquisition, and learners reported increased confidence and perceived relevance of the word list to their studies. The findings highlight CBM-aligned vocabulary instruction’s pedagogical potential, supported by technology-enhanced delivery systems, in tertiary education. This approach offers a replicable model for aligning assessment, instruction and content in ESP instruction for low-proficiency English learners.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.487
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.331
Teacher spread0.317 · 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.

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 venueEnglish Language TeachingSame topicSecond Language Acquisition and LearningFrench-language works237,207