MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037454143 · doi:10.3138/cmlr.60.3.295

Developing the Curriculum for Intensive French

2004· article· en· W2037454143 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Joan Netten, Claude Germain

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Modern Language Review/ La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFrench Language Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumFluencyAP French LanguageCognitionMathematics educationCurriculum developmentPsychologyPedagogyLiteracyCore (optical fiber)SociologyLinguisticsComputer scienceLanguage educationPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article describes the way in which the curriculum for intensive French was developed. Reference is made to its similarities to and differences from both the multidimensional curriculum proposed by the National Core French Study and the communicative approach. The importance of learning outcomes stated in terms of communicative outcomes (language functions) is discussed first. The content of the curriculum is then presented under five headings that are related to the five theoretical principles underlying the conception of intensive French: authentic communication, literacy development, cognitive development, interaction, and the development of accuracy and fluency. The role of compacting the regular curriculum in the development of the intensive French program is also explained.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.114

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations9
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Modern Language Review/ La Revue canadienne des langues vivantesSame topicFrench Language Learning MethodsFrench-language works237,207