MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971753459 · doi:10.1017/s0261444813000293

Research at the Centre for Educational Research on Languages and Literacies (CERLL) at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto (OISE/UT)

2013· article· en· W1971753459 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Robert Kohls, Jennifer Shade Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenueLanguage Teaching · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMultilingual Education and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of TorontoSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaUniversiteit van AmsterdamUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsResearch centreIndigenousSociologyCurriculumPedagogyPolitical scienceLibrary scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

After more than 40 years as the Modern Language Centre, members of the Centre decided to rename ourselves as the Centre for Educational Research on Languages and Literacies (CERLL), to better reflect our current activities and interests. We officially launched the new name for the Centre at a reception on 22 October 2010, and produced a compilation of recent publications by members of the Centre to mark the event. Our interests in research and graduate studies remain fundamentally as they have been for decades, focused on theories and practices in teaching, learning, curriculum, assessment, and policies related to English and French as second or international languages as well as other international, minority, heritage, or indigenous languages. The name change does signal a broadening of perspectives to include research on various forms and types of literacies, though we do not claim to be ‘post-modern’ in doing so.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.943
Threshold uncertainty score0.412

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0060.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0370.004

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 head0.173
GPT teacher head0.544
Teacher spread0.372 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLanguage TeachingSame topicMultilingual Education and PolicyFrench-language works237,207