Teacher Preparation and Nonnative English-Speaking Educators
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION Nonnative English-speaking (NNES) educators constitute a large majority of English as a second or foreign language teachers around the world (Canagarajah 1999). However, it is only recently that they have become more visible and that the field of teaching English to speakers of other languages (TESOL) has begun to address issues that are of concern to them. Although there is wide agreement that the terms native and nonnative speaker are impossible to define (Kaplan 1999) and that they “obviously and pointlessly dichotomise the world neatly into ‘us’ and them” (Kaplan 1999: 5), the reality is that “teachers who are perceived as speaking a language other than English as their mother tongue – regardless of their actual proficiency with English – are typically labelled as ‘nonnative English speakers’” (Pasternak and Bailey 2004: 156). This chapter focuses on NNES educators in relation to issues of language teacher preparation programs. SCOPE AND DEFINITIONS It could be argued that work on NNES teachers-in-preparation has focused on two different broad themes related to the setting in which language teacher-education programs are offered. Specifically, the first theme deals with issues of teacher language proficiency in relation to language teacher-preparation programs. With some exceptions, this line of work has been the focus of attention in teacher-preparation programs for / in English as a foreign language (EFL) settings (e.g., Barnes 2002; Berry 1990; Chacon 2005; Cullen 1994, 2002; Lavender 2002; Murdoch 1994, etc.). Work on issues of language proficiency draws on the notion that “a teacher’s confidence is most dependent on his or her own degree of language competence” (Murdoch 1994: 258); therefore, it deals with language as a skill that needs to be improved for a teacher to be a successful professional. The second theme has mainly focused on issues of teachers-in-preparation in Inner Circle settings, where English is the dominant language (U.S., U.K., Canada, Australia, New Zealand); therefore, it may not be surprising that work in this area has dealt with how NNES teachers-in-preparation socialize into their language education programs in these countries, how they perceive themselves in relation to their English-speaking peers, and how they develop a sense of professional identity (e.g., Brutt-Griffler and Samimy 1999; Golombek and Jordan 2005; Morita 2004; Thomas 1999; Pavlenko 2003, etc).
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.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,052 | 0,000 |
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 découle