MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1540656854

An Analysis and Interpretation of Intercultural Approaches to English Language Teaching

2011· article· en· W1540656854 on OpenAlexaff
Linda Rappel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSecond Language Learning and Teaching
Canadian institutionsAthabasca University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLanguage educationIntercultural communicationLanguage assessmentLinguisticsHegemonyCultural diversityLanguage industryIntercultural relationsSociologyComprehension approachDominance (genetics)PedagogyPolitical scienceAnthropology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this paper is to examine the impact of English language teaching (ELT) with a global perspective while recognizing the role of intercultural approaches in second language instruction. Recent concerns about the influence of English as a global language and linguistic imperialism in ELT resulting from the widespread instruction and use of English as a second language for communication have initiated interest in the adoption of culture learning and the development of intercultural awareness in second language education as a way to reduce linguistic and cultural dominance by encouraging attitudes of cultural tolerance and linguistic diversity in language teaching. This paper analyzes the implications surrounding the implementation of intercultural practices in second language teaching to reduce hegemonic tendencies, reviews approaches to ELT that have roots in traditional language teaching theory reflecting a tendency toward linguistic imperialism and colonization, and suggests ways of approaching English language instruction that promote cultural tolerance, intercultural awareness and cultural diversity.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0050.022
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations9
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSecond Language Learning and TeachingFrench-language works237,207