MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134578197

From Action to Insight: A Professional Learning Community's Experiences with the European Language Portfolio

2011· article· en· W2134578197 on OpenAlexaff
Paula Kristmanson, Chantal Lafargue, Karla Culligan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSecond Language Learning and Teaching
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPortfolioContext (archaeology)PedagogyForeign languageProfessional developmentProfessional learning communityAction researchAction (physics)Language educationProcess (computing)Set (abstract data type)SociologyPolitical scienceBusinessComputer scienceGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper focuses on an action research project set in the context of one professional learning community’s (PLC’s) exploration of the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) and the European Language Portfolio (ELP). Teachers of second and foreign languages in a large urban high school examined the potential of principles and tools related to the CEFR and ELP and shared their experiences during PLC meetings. This study examines data collected as part of the PLC discussions and deliberations and presents two particular pedagogical results emerging from this work: the development of a philosophical stance and an action plan. The paper concludes with a discussion of the process in which teachers engaged as they co-constructed understanding and explored pedagogical implications of their professional dialogue. Résumé Cet article traite d'un projet de recherche action mené dans le contexte d'une communauté d'apprentissage professionnelle (CAP) qui a exploré le Cadre européen commun de référence (CECR) et le Portfolio européen des langues (PEL) et comment la CAP les a mis en œuvre dans des classes de langue. Les enseignants des langues secondes et étrangères situés à une école secondaire urbaine ont partagé leurs expériences lors des réunions de CAP. Cette étude analyse les données recueillies lors des discussions et des délibérations de la CAP et elle présente deux résultats pédagogiques particuliers émergeant de ce travail— le développement d’une approche philosophique et un plan d’action. L'article se termine sur une discussion des processus vécus par les enseignants en co-construisant leurs connaissances pédagogiques par l’entremise du dialogue professionnel.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0190.028
Scholarly communication0.0160.016
Open science0.0030.028
Research integrity0.0070.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 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

Citations23
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSecond Language Learning and TeachingFrench-language works237,207