Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les quatre de l'enseignement habiletés d'une langue étrangère incluent écrite la production (EP) comme une composante indispensable pour la langue de la maîtrise. Cependant, est-ce que la la manière dont on les manuels scolaires travaille dans cette capacité developpe? Selon Courtillon (2003), la présentation d'un modèle d'écriture est si on veut makeup bag éviter la production d'un texte qui suit les structures de la langue maternelle. Cette étude du notre orientation conduira manuel Le Nouveau Taxi! 1 (Capelle, Menaud, 2009), qui est dans le utilisé couramment cours de français élémentaire (FREN * 1150) à l'Université de Guelph affirme Mener et qui à la langue de la maîtrise écrite. Développer recherche pour notre: i) nous de la présentation des discuterons écrites tâches et des genres textuels; et à un niveau deuxième ii) analyserons nous le recit d'expérience et le journal de bord de l'enseignante courante du cours. Ces données, complétées par les résultats des études antérieures (Schneuwly, Dolz 1997 et Sales Lamb, Michelangelo de Azevedo, Prado Mattos, 2000), nous permettront of discuter de la pertinence de l'approche actionnelle présentée dans ce manuel pour la maîtrise of la langue et de son utilization comment promeut class or en pas cette capacité.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Other About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Other About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Other design | low |
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 | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".