Critical Practice in Community-Based ESL Programs: A Canadian Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article I examine a number of conceptual priorities for critical practice and their potential application in community-based English as a Second Language (ESL) programs. I begin by outlining a brief history and development of community language programming in Canada and Toronto. Based on these origins, I argue that community-based ESL pedagogies should be informed by educational discourses that are more socially and ideologically focused. I then discuss key concepts such as community and identity and their relevance to classroom concerns, after which I propose that community ESL be conceptualized as a form of critical practice, comprised of both a transformative and reflexive dimension. These 2 dimensions of critical practice are then explained and developed in respect to a lesson on the 1995 Quebec referendum on sovereignty and the related issue of how notions of citizenship are addressed in ESL. From this example of community-based ESL, I conclude with a few generalizations and suggestions for other language programs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.025 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.056 | 0.080 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".