Negotiating Curricular Transitions: Foreign Language Teachers' Learning Experience with Content-Based Instruction
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
Content-based instruction (CBI) has been touted as an effective curricular approach in a wide range of educational contexts, including immersion and English as a second language. Yet this approach to curriculum design is rarely implemented in conventional K–16 foreign language (FL) programs in the United States today. The phenomenological study described here attempted to gain a deeper understanding of factors affecting the implementation of CBI by exploring three traditional FL teachers' learning experiences during a year-long professional-development program designed to introduce the approach. Transitioning toward CBI, the findings suggest, can be a professionally intimidating experience, involving a struggle to re-examine one's own teaching identity and one's vision of what teaching and learning ought to be. Important implications emerging from this study include a need for professional-development programs to better scaffold teachers' learning experience and to create safer environments for teachers to explore pedagogical alternatives.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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