MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055230785 · doi:10.3138/cmlr.60.2.173

Teacher Adaptations in Core French: A Case Study of One Grade 9 Class

2003· article· en· W2055230785 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Katy Arnett

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Modern Language Review/ La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicReading and Literacy Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdaptation (eye)Class (philosophy)Mathematics educationLexiconCore (optical fiber)Foreign languagePedagogyPsychologyEnglish as a foreign languageComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the introduction of the term 'learning disabilities' into the educational lexicon, teachers and researchers have endeavoured to determine the best ways to adapt teachers' pedagogies to address the needs of students with these challenges in the classroom. Most of the recommended strategies have been designed with the traditional classes in mind - English, Science, Math, and History. However, in recent years, there has been an increased awareness of a need for knowledge about adaptation strategies that are suitable for the goals of the second/foreign language classroom. This study reports the findings of an observation study that was designed to identify which adaptation strategies that had been recommended in the learning disabilities research literature were feasibly implemented in one Grade 9 core French class in Ontario; such insight will enable other core French and second/foreign language teachers to make their classes more inclusive.

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)0.001
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.732
Threshold uncertainty score0.533

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations25
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Modern Language Review/ La Revue canadienne des langues vivantesSame topicReading and Literacy DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207