MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005184358 · doi:10.5539/ijel.v2n2p91

University English Teachers’ Identity in Minority Area: A Case Study of a Trilingual Teacher in China

2012· article· en· W2005184358 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Baiyinna Wu, Wurenbilige Wurenbilige

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of English Linguistics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Education and Multiculturalism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdentity (music)ChinaSubject (documents)PedagogyPsychologyIdentity formationMathematics educationSociologySelf-conceptSocial psychologyPolitical scienceComputer scienceLibrary science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Teacher identity is a very hot topic attracting lots of researchers’ attention in teaching and teacher development since it treats teachers as whole persons in and across social and contexts who continually reconstruct their views of themselves in relation to others, workplace characteristics, professional purposes, and cultures of teaching. As one aspect of teacher identity, minority teachers’ identity has begun to gain great interest in this area. The present study investigates Mongolian English university teachers’ identity formation in minority area. The study addressed the following three research questions: What is the identity of Mongolian English teachers at university? How do Mongolian English teachers at university perceive their identity? What are the factors influencing their identity formation? The findings suggest that Mongolian English teacher’s identity is complex and multifaceted, which is influenced by various factors, among which the subject’s learning experiences as being a third language learner play very crucial role in constructing her identity.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.163

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0160.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.330 · 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

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of English LinguisticsSame topicGlobal Education and MulticulturalismFrench-language works237,207