MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114310801 · doi:10.5539/ies.v8n7p21

Concentrated Language Encounter Approach in Practice for Global Teaching of Literacy: Lighthouse Strategy Implementation

2015· article· en· W2114310801 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Saowalak Rattanavich

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSecond Language Learning and Teaching
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRotary Foundation
KeywordsLiteracyEthnic groupMathematics educationLiteracy educationPedagogyTeaching methodSociologyComputer sciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents the lighthouse literacy strategies model using the concentrated language encounter (CLE) approach that has been successfully replicated in many countries in different languages and cultures. A review of CLE research studies and the project implementation in Thailand showed highly significant results in students’ literacy skill improvement. The theoretical bases were derived from the research on language education in Australia with aboriginal children. Through the implementation program in Thailand, three CLE models/stages in teaching language and a specific ‘train the trainers’ program were developed at different levels of literacy skills. Four different types of CLE literacy programs that include formal, informal, special education, and ethnic groups were successfully implemented.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.013
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.369 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Education StudiesSame topicSecond Language Learning and TeachingFrench-language works237,207