Notice bibliographique
Résumé
06–235Akinjobi, Adenike (U Ibadan, Nigeria), Vowel reduction and suffixation in Nigeria. English Today (Cambridge University Press) 22.1 (2006), 10–17. 06–236Bernat, Eva (Macquarie U, Australia; Eva.Bernat@nceltr.mq.edu.au ) & Inna Gvozdenko, Beliefs about language learning: Current knowledge, pedagogical implications, and new research directions. TESL-EJ ( www.tesl-ej.org ) 9.1 (2005), 21 pp. 06–237Cheater, Angela P. (Macau Polytechnic Institute, China), Beyond meatspace – or, geeking out in e-English. English Today (Cambridge University Press) 22.1 (2006), 18–28. 06–238Chen, Liang (Lehigh U, Pennsylvania, USA; cheng@cse.lehigh.edu ), Indexical relations and sound motion pictures in L2 curricula: the dynamic role of the teacher. The Canadian Modern Language Review (University of Toronto Press) 62.2 (2005), 263–284. 06–239Cristobel, E. & E. Llurda (U de Lleida, Spain; ellurda@dal.udl.es ), Learners' preferences regarding types of language school: An exploratory market research. System (Elsevier) 34.1 (2006), 135–148. 06–240Diab, Rula (American U of Beirut, Lebanon; rd10@aub.edu.lb ), University students' beliefs about learning English and French in Lebanon. System (Elsevier) 34.1 (2006), 80–96. 06–241Frankenberg-Garcia, Ana (Instituto Superior de Línguas e Administração, Lisbon, Portugal; ana.frankenberg@sapo.pt ), A peek into what today's language learners as researchers actually do. The International Journal of Lexicography (Oxford University Press) 18.3 (2005), 335–355. 06–242Gao, Xuesong (U Hong Kong, China; Xuesong.Gao@hkusua.hku.hk ), Understanding changes in Chinese students' uses of learning strategies in China and Britain: A socio-cultural re-interpretation. System (Elsevier) 34.1 (2006), 55–67. 06–243Green, Bridget (Mukogawa Fort Wright Institute, USA), A framework for teaching grammar to Japanese learners in an intensive English program. The Language Teacher (Japan Association for Language Teaching) 30.2 (2006), 3–11. 06–244Harker, Mihye & Dmitra Koutsantoni (The Leadership Foundation for Higher Education, London, UK; mihyeharker@lfhe.ac.uk ), Can it be as effective? Distance versus blended learning in a web-based EAP programme. ReCALL (Cambridge University Press) 17.2 (2005), 197–216. 06–245Hawkins, Roger (U Essex, Colchester, UK; roghawk@essex.ac.uk ), The contribution of the theory of Universal Grammar to our understanding of the acquisition of French as a second language. Journal of French Language Studies (Cambridge University Press) 14.3 (2004), 233–255. 06–246Hinger, Barbara (U Innsbruck, Austria; barbara.hinger@uibk.ac.at ), The distribution of instructional time and its effect on group cohesion in the foreign language classroom: a comparison of intensive and standard format courses. System (Elsevier) 34.1 (2006), 97–118. 06–247Jing, Huang (Zhanjiang Teachers U/U of Hong Kong, China), Metacognition training in the Chinese university classroom: An action research study. Educational Action Research (Routledge/Taylor & Francis) 13.3 (2005), 413–434. 06–248Kapec, Peter (Fachhochschule Bonn-Rhein-Sieg, Sankt Augustin, Germany; Peter.Kapec@fh-bonn-rhein-sieg.de ) & Klaus Schweinhorst, In two minds? Learner attitudes to bilingualism and the bilingual tandem analyser. ReCALL (Cambridge University Press) 17.2 (2005), 254–268. 06–249Kervin, Lisa,Students talking about home–school communication: Can technology support this process?Australian Journal of Language and Literacy (Australian Literacy Educators' Association) 28.2 (2005), 150–163. 06–250Kwon, Minsook (Samjeon Elementary School, Korea), Teaching talk as a game of catch. The Canadian Modern Language Review (University of Toronto Press) 62.2 (2005), 335–348. 06–251Lyster, Roy (McGill U, Montréal, Canada; roy.lyster@mcgill.ca ), Research on form-focused instruction in immersion classrooms: implications for theory and practice. Journal of French Language Studies (Cambridge University Press) 14.3 (2004), 321–341. 06–252Makarova, Veronika (U Saskatchewan, Canada), The effect of poetry practice on English pronunciation acquisition by Japanese EFL learners. The Language Teacher (Japan Association for Language Teaching) 30.3 (2006), 3–9. 06–253Mckinney, Carolyn (U Witwatersrand, South Africa), A balancing act: Ethical dilemmas of democratic teaching within critical pedagogy. Educational Action Research (Routledge/Taylor & Francis) 13.3 (2005), 375–392. 06–254Morgan-Short, Kara (Georgetown U, USA; morgankd@georgetown.edu ) & Harriet Wood Bowden, Processing instruction and meaningful output-based instruction: effects on second language development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition (Cambridge University Press) 28.1 (2006), 31–65. 06–255Munro, Murray J. (Simon Fraser U, Canada; mjmunro@sfu.ca ), Tracey M. Derwing & Susan L. Morton, The mutual intelligibility of L2 speech. Studies in Second Language Acquisition (Cambridge University Press) 28.1 (2006), 111–131. 06–256Myles, Florence (U Newcastle, UK; Florence.Myles@newcastle.ac.uk ), French second language acquisition research: Setting the scene. Journal of French Language Studies (Cambridge University Press) 14.3 (2004), 211–232. 06–257Mynard, Jo & Iman Almarzouqui (Koryo College, Japan; mynardjo@hotmail.com ), Investigating peer tutoring. ELT Journal (Oxford University Press) 60.1 (2006), 13–22. 06–258Neumeier, Petra (Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Munich, Germany; petra.neumeier@lmu.de ), A closer look at blended learning – parameters for designing a blended learning environment for language teaching and learning. ReCALL (Cambridge University Press) 17.2 (2005), 163–178. 06–259Noels, Kimberly, A. (U Alberta, Canada; knoels@ualberta.ca ), Orientations to learning German: Heritage language learning and motivational substrates. The Canadian Modern Language Review (University of Toronto Press) 62.2 (2005), 285–312. 06–260Ohata, Kota (International Christian U, Tokyo, Japan; ohata@icu.ac.jp ), Potential sources of anxiety for Japanese learners of English: Preliminary case interviews with five Japanese college students in the U.S.TESL-EJ ( www.tesl-ej.org ) 9.3 (2005), 21 pp. 06–261Peltola, Maija S. (U Turku, Finland; maija.peltola@utu.fi ) & Olli Aaltonen, Long-term memory trace activation for vowels depending on the mother tongue and the linguistic content. Journal of Psychophysiology (Hogrefe & Huber Publishers) 19.3 (2005), 159–164. 06–262
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,007 | 0,006 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,395 | 0,268 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».