MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002675093 · doi:10.3138/cmlr.65.1.61

Entrée dans l’écrit en contexte plurilingue et défavorisé : développer les capacités métaphonologiques et sensibiliser à la diversité linguistique

2008· article· en· W2002675093 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Françoise Armand, François Sirois, Samira Ababou

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Modern Language Review/ La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicReading and Literacy Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyHumanitiesClass (philosophy)Mathematics educationArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: This article presents the results of research conducted in multilingual and underprivileged schools in Montreal. The goals of the first study were to observe the effects of participation in activities involving metaphonological capacities and the development of these capacities, as well as pre-reading abilities in French as a second language, among 107 students of immigrant origin in seven kindergarten classes (age five). A further analysis was conducted in order to determine whether there were differences in the results according to the type of intervention (with or without language awareness) and according to the type of class (regular or welcoming class). The second study involved the participation of a smaller number of students, specifically those attending the three welcoming classes in the school. In particular, it aimed to observe the effects of activities promoting language awareness on the students’ representations of the status of their first language (L1) in relation to that of the French language (L2) at their school and, in general, how they viewed linguistic diversity.

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)0.005
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 score0.161
Threshold uncertainty score0.319

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations13
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Modern Language Review/ La Revue canadienne des langues vivantesSame topicReading and Literacy DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207