MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1658783627 · doi:10.18806/tesl.v19i2.928

Speaking Their Sex: A Study of Gender and Linguistic Space in an ESL Classroom

2002· article· en· W1658783627 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
Allyson Julé

Bibliographic record

VenueTESL Canada Journal · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMultilingual Education and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSimon Fraser University
KeywordsSpace (punctuation)PsychologySilenceGirlFocus (optics)LinguisticsMainlandDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study is an exploration of the amount of talk (also referred to as "linguistic space," Mahony, 1985) used by girls as opposed to boys in a grade 2 ESL classroom located in the Lower Mainland of British Columbia. The focus was on the amount of language used by the girls in teacher-led classroom lessons. Data were collected through videotaped observations, which were then transcribed, measured by counting words, and analyzed for conversational opportunities. The findings revealed that being a girl may have affected participation in the classroom lessons, and by extension affected language-learning opportunities. The particular lack of linguistic space in the girls' experience suggests that the girls in this classroom may be limited in language use. Their silence appeared partly influenced by the teacher's response to their comments. The article concludes with a discussion of gender as a significant linguistic variable in an ESL experience.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.006
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations18
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTESL Canada JournalSame topicMultilingual Education and PolicyFrench-language works237,207