Performance of Francophone Secondary School Leavers in English Structure and Written Expression
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study looks into the performance in English of Francophone learners in general, and into their mastery of structure and written expression in particular. The informants were 430 pupils who had just obtained the Baccalauréat , the certificate required for admission into tertiary education, and who came from different schools in ten regions of the country. The data were a collection of answers to a TOEFL-like test designed to check these pupils’ knowledge of English structure. The analysis revealed that these pupils did not attain college level English, and the English test they took at the Baccalauréat did not seem to effectively assess knowledge of structure. To ensure that Francophones do perform well in English, there is a need to re-orient the English language syllabus and to use the time allocated to the English subject (3 hours a week for seven years) to teach them the substance of English-medium primary education content. When this is done, they would be able to take the First School Leaving Certificate examination before they complete French-medium secondary education.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it