DO INSTRUCTION AND EXPOSURE MAKE A DIFFERENCE ON THE LEARNING OF ORTHOGRAPHIC SPELLING BY SPEAKERS OF A REGIONAL VARIETY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Referential French is a complex written code acquired at school by speakers of vernacular varieties (Barbaud 1997).The goal of this study is to investigate the influence of instruction and exposure on subjects' production of several elements of Referential French which Lefran~ois, Laurier, Lazure, and Claing (2005) showed to be problematic and which showed improvement after instruction, that is l'orthographe grammaticale 'grammatical spelling'.Grammatical spelling is an aspect of spelling in French which involves inflected forms of words.A controlled-production task was administered to 80 speakers of New Brunswick Acadian French who were students at a francophone university in the Maritime Provinces.There were 40 subjects in their first year of studies and 40 in their fourth or subsequent year.A number of aspects of orthographic spelling were examined: verb forms in the passe simple, past participial forms and agreement, and subject-verb agreement.Results showed that while there was still variability in the fourth-year students' use, their performance was significantly closer to Referential French than that of the first-year students.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".