MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138204778 · doi:10.3138/cmlr.67.4.508

Norme pédagogique et infirmières bilingues en milieu francophone minoritaire

2011· article· fr· W2138204778 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Suzie Beaulieu

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Modern Language Review/ La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes · 2011
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInterpreting and Communication in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFrenchHumanitiesLinguisticsSociologyNorm (philosophy)PsychologyPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Résumé Les infirmières œuvrant dans leur langue seconde (L2) font face à divers problèmes langagiers en milieu clinique dont la difficulté à comprendre l'accent des patients et les expressions appartenant au registre familier qu'ils emploient. Ces résultats sont peu surprenants puisque l'enseignement des L2 est souvent implicitement orienté vers l'acquisition de la variété standard de la langue cible. Pour intégrer une plus grande variété linguistique dans l'enseignement des L2, le concept de norme pédagogique, qui en premier lieu vise à refléter le comportement linguistique observable des locuteurs de la langue cible, peut être utilisé. Cette étude propose de déterminer la norme pédagogique à adopter dans la formation langagière en français L2 d’étudiants en sciences infirmières en milieu minoritaire francophone.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.263
Threshold uncertainty score0.529

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Citations8
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Modern Language Review/ La Revue canadienne des langues vivantesSame topicInterpreting and Communication in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207