MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131859781 · doi:10.2304/elea.2008.5.4.492

Access to Creativity: Position of Technology in the Ontario Curriculum for English Language Learners

2008· article· en· W2131859781 on OpenAlex
Miwa Aoki Takeuchi

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueE-Learning and Digital Media · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiteracy, Media, and Education
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Christian StudiesUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEllCurriculumInformation and Communications TechnologyLiteracyCreativityMathematics educationPedagogyComputer sciencePosition paperSociologyPsychologyTeaching methodWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this policy research note, the author examines how Ontario curriculum documents for English language learners (ELLs) address information and communication technology (ICT). Upon analysis, three characteristics were identified, as follows: the superiority of standardized English, technology as an ambiguous tool, and under-representation of students' home literacy practices. ICT in the curriculum for ELLs was, at best, described as a tool for English language acquisition or for functional computer literacy. By examining these characteristics from the perspective of critical theory, ELLs still have difficulty in gaining access to creative uses of ICT. Consequently, the current state of the curriculum will result in sustaining or increasing the literacy divide between ELLs and non-ELLs.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.115
Threshold uncertainty score0.245

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.238 · 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