MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159575580 · doi:10.3138/cmlr.58.1.156

Language and Content in Social Practice: A Case Study

2001· article· en· W2159575580 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Margaret Early

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Modern Language Review/ La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Systems and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial constructivismPedagogyAction (physics)Order (exchange)Professional developmentConstructivist teaching methodsSociologyMathematics educationPublic relationsTeaching methodPolitical sciencePsychologyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper argues that schools need to implement substantial, systemic changes in pedagogy, school organization, and professional development in order to adequately address the changing demographic realities of their communities and the educational imperatives of the 'new economy.' The paper reports on one district's response to this challenge as it sought to implement two action research projects for teachers and administrators to achieve school-wide emphasis on integrated language and content instruction. The analysis suggests that the approach taken (Mohan's Knowledge Framework in combination with principles of social constructivist learning) was successful in drawing teachers' attention to the role of language as a medium of learning, and identifies common elements, together with differences, in the ways in which two pairs of teachers worked to design learning experiences for their students. The paper concludes that the approach taken in this school district provides a good starting place for teachers' and students' analysis of classroom practices and encourages other districts to benefit from its example and understandings.

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 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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.128
Threshold uncertainty score0.887

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations24
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Modern Language Review/ La Revue canadienne des langues vivantesSame topicEducation Systems and PolicyFrench-language works237,207