MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008369316 · doi:10.3138/cmlr.63.5.761

Les élèves allophones dans les programmes de français seconde langue officielle: revue de la littérature

2007· article· en· W2008369316 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Callie Mady

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Modern Language Review/ La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMultilingual Education and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSection (typography)Inclusion (mineral)Computer scienceProcess (computing)HumanitiesSpecial sectionPolitical scienceLinguisticsSociologyPhysicsArtSocial sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: In Canada, education in French as a second language (FSL) offers students the opportunity to learn a second official language. Is such an opportunity appropriate for allophone students who are still in the process of learning English? This literature review provides a four-fold consideration of the issue. Section 1 examines the political response by investigating whether Canadian federal policies provide for the inclusion of allophone students in FSL programs. Section 2 provides an overview of provincial policies, specifically examining allophone students’ access to FSL. A review of the literature regarding the motivation of allophone students is found in Section 3. Finally, Section 4 details the research on the achievement of allophone students studying French.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.933
Threshold uncertainty score0.196

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.012
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Modern Language Review/ La Revue canadienne des langues vivantesSame topicMultilingual Education and PolicyFrench-language works237,207