MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126753715 · doi:10.5539/ass.v10n24p231

Formation of Lingual Identity in Preschool Institutions of the Republic of Tatarstan

2014· article· en· W2126753715 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Practices and Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTatarIdentity (music)The RepublicLinguisticsPsychologyThird stageMathematics educationGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the Republic of Tatarstan (Russian Federation) we meet with a certain discrepancy when deal with the problem of lingual identity formation. Therefore the outcomes of coordinated (synchronous, simultaneous) teaching of Russian, Tatar and English languages to preschool level children are to be analysed. In Tatarstan it emerged, on the one hand, from the need to learn three languages rather than two, i.e. Tatar, Russian and English languages at an active speaking level. The problems of lingual identity formation in preschool institutions of the Republic of Tatarstan are depicted. The research showed that children relatively easily and quickly remember the words, learn to use them in their speech, show their interest in differences between the languages. If in the course of the second stage of research 40% of children got high score, then during the third stage 80% revealed good knowledge, which makes the majority of the group. Children recognize familiar words, can name the things, try to make sentences in all three languages. It's quite natural, that not all children can master language material, but there's a tendency that answers of all children become more confident and precise to the third stage of research.At the first stage, children did not understand the difference between the languages. At the second stage children confused languages, made mistakes in their answers, while at the third stage there were far less mistakes.Monitoring is very important in teaching languages, since it allows to estimate the level of mastering language material, to define group of children who feel it difficult to learn languages in order to carry out additional work on subject revision.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.861
Threshold uncertainty score0.488

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.351 · 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