Bibliographic record
Abstract
Current second language programmes in elementary school in France that aim at providing instruction in regional, foreign European or immigrant languages are critically examined, not separately, as it has been done up to now, but all together and in a broader context. The historical development leading to the dominance of French, but also to the demand for instruction in other languages, is presented to explain the existence and objectives of the various programmes. The concept of language needs, often used but seldom defined, is discussed briefly, and the arguments for early language instruction are reviewed. The chronology, successes and failures of the various foreign language programmes or experiments, in particular the most recent one, are investigated using official documents and results of evaluations. The analysis reveals shortcomings in organization and teachers' training and the necessity of improving teaching methods to meet the challenges of instruction in a variety of languages at a high level of quality. For the latter purpose, methods that have been successful in other contexts are reviewed, in particular the immersion method and the self-learning method used in Canada, and the methods of the so-called European Schools. The conclusions are as follows. In order to respond to the demands of the public and the pressure of the international economic and political stiuation, French schools should be able to produce at least bilingual citizens. To this end, it is highly desirable to start foreign language instruction as early as possible. It should start at the beginning of elementary school for all children in France, and every child should continue to learn the language it has had in elementary school in secondary school. Instruction in elementary school should focus on comprehension, but after secondary school the students should be able to speak at least one foreign language. To make the instruction more efficient, a more flexible method that incorporates ideas from immersion and self-learning is proposed. Moreover, to improve organizational aspects, it is proposed that parents get the opportunity to control the programme more strictly. Eventually, these programmes should evolve after the model of the European School, which has proven very successful.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".