MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088967633 · doi:10.3138/cmlr.65.1.89

Of Mother Tongues and Other Tongues: The Stakes of Linguistically Inclusive Pedagogy in Minority Contexts

2008· article· en· W2088967633 on OpenAlexfundvenueaboutno aff
Lisa Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Modern Language Review/ La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMultilingual Education and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPedagogySociologyMulticulturalismLiteracyCurriculumNegotiationIdentity (music)HegemonyGender studiesPolitical scienceSocial sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: This article addresses two key challenges that globalization poses to literacy research: the need for new models of literacy and literacy education, and the stakes of adopting multiliteracies pedagogies in different contexts – that is, the tensions between competing hegemonic discourses of collective identity in the public sphere of ethnolinguistic minority societies that are sparked when globalization destabilizes monocultural institutional practices. I explore the stakes of multiliteracies practice within Québec, an increasingly poly-ethnic white settler society and proto-nation whose minority ethnonational project has been launched on the very terrain of federal multiculturalism within a bilingual framework and provincial interculturalism within a monolingual framework. The article reports on a qualitative study of teacher discourse following collaborative multiliteracies curriculum development in an ethnolinguistically diverse English-language Montréal elementary school. It focuses on the shifting conceptions of multilingual and academic literacies articulated as teachers bring the ‘lens of the personal’ to negotiate competing values and identities implicit in their emerging practice.

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 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)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.766
Threshold uncertainty score0.596

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.346 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations28
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Modern Language Review/ La Revue canadienne des langues vivantesSame topicMultilingual Education and PolicyFrench-language works237,207