Qualité de l’écrit au niveau intermédiaire en immersion française : effet d’un programme intensif et hypothèse d’un effet de plateau
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Two cohorts of French immersion students in a British Columbia school who were entering Grades 4 and 5 respectively participated in the study and were each tested at the end of Grades 5 and 7. The Grade 4 cohort followed the newly introduced 80% French, 20% English language (high intensity) program, while the Grade 5 students followed the 50% French, 50% English language (low intensity) program. Compositions written in Grades 5 and 7 by each group were analysed and compared in regard to the lexical, grammatical and discourse development. Results showed an increase in the quality of writing between the beginning of Grade 5 and the end of Grade 7. However, students from the cohort who received a higher intensity of French instruction did not achieve any better in vocabulary, grammar and discourse development than the students in the low intensity group. The results showed a plateau effect between Grades 5 and 7 for only two of the variables investigated: vocabulary diversity and frequency of time markers. Moreover, apart from the percentage of correct prepositions, there was no difference in the writing quality of the two Grade 7 groups based on level of intensity.
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.
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 | 0.034 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 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 it