MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015582919 · doi:10.1080/00131910500149416

Gender gaps in group listening and speaking: issues in social constructivist approaches to teaching and learning

2005· article· en· W2015582919 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueEducational Review · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActive listeningPsychologyCurriculumSocial constructivismConstructivist teaching methodsLiteracyPedagogyCentralityMathematics educationTeaching method

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Because of its centrality to school success, social status, and workplace effectiveness, oral and aural skills development has been increasingly emphasized in Canadian curricula, classrooms and, very recently, large‐scale assessment. The corresponding emphasis on group processes and collaborative learning has aimed to address equity issues in schools. However, a 1998 Canadian assessment of students' speech communication skills ( N = 551 groups) yielded many significant gender differences in individual listening skills, group production, and self‐efficacy. The oral production in small groups of majority‐ or all‐male groups lagged significantly behind that of all‐female groups. The girl–boy gaps in oracy parallel those evident for literacy in provincial (state), national and international studies among adolescents. Implications are drawn for social constructivist pedagogy, for curricular, instructional, and evaluation practices, and for redressing gender differences.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score0.446

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.202 · 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