MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7162002486 · doi:10.82308/31257

“Now that I have the confidence to speak, I can talk to people”: Understanding the value and place of cocurricular and extracurricular activities hosted by university language learning centers.

2025· dissertation· en· W7162002486 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Chama Laassassy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsValue (mathematics)PerceptionCompetence (human resources)Language acquisitionQualitative researchFormal learningThematic analysisMultilingualismExperiential learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, research on informal language learning has expanded significantly (Dressman & Sadler, 2020), highlighting its role in increasing learner motivation, confidence, and real-world communicative competence (Montrul, 2019, Mihre & Fiskum, 2021, Polat & Kim, 2014, Arndt, 2019). However, very few studies (Reva, 2012; Cabrera Arias, 2022) have examined institutionally organized informal activities within university language centers that are designed to complement formal instruction. This qualitative study investigates Cocurricular and Extracurricular Activities (CECA) within two Quebec university language learning centers. Using a phenomenological approach, ecological framework, and reflective thematic analysis, the research explores students’ value perception of CECAs as well as the role that CECAs play within the programs investigated. The findings reveal that CECAs are highly valued by participants, providing a unique opportunity to enhance confidence and competence, particularly in "real-life" language use and cultural competence, and emphasizes the importance of facilitators who are credited for creating a supportive, low-pressure environment for students. Despite their recognized benefits, administrators highlight challenges such as resource limitations and lack of visibility within academic institutions. Overall, this study underscores the potential of CECAs to bridge the gap between formal classroom instruction and real-world language 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.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.214
Threshold uncertainty score0.425

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.019
Scholarly communication0.0100.006
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 topicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning→French-language works237,207→