Developing the Knowledge Base of ESL and FSL Teachers for K-12 Programs in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this paper, I examine the contextual factors that impact the development ofknowledge base of teachers of English as a second language (ESL) and French as asecond language (FSL) for teaching in Kindergarten through Grade 12 programs inOntario. Using a sociocultural orientation to second language teacher education andprominent knowledge base frameworks from the field, I discuss how a variety oflocal contextual factors impact the development of teacher candidates’ (TC)knowledge base in pre-service teacher education programs in Canada. Individualfactors include: the linguistic and cultural backgrounds of candidates’ in ESL andFSL programs, the TCs’ language proficiency in the target language, their personalexperiences and understanding of language development, and their familiarity withreal life experiences of ESL and FSL students. Beyond their own experiences,integral to TCs knowledge base are the range of student populations they couldserve and the variety of language teaching contexts they can encounter in theOntario context. I discuss the implications of such nuances for policy and practicein language teacher education programs across Canada.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".