MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2289414357

French as a Second Language Teacher Candidates’ Conceptions of Allophone Students and Students With Learning Difficulties

2015· article· en· W2289414357 on OpenAlexaffabout
Callie Mady, Katy Arnett

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMultilingual Education and Policy
Canadian institutionsNipissing University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesSociocultural evolutionSociologyArtAnthropology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The diversity of Canada’s French as a second language (FSL) student population is increasing with the growing numbers of Allophones and students with learning difficulties. Educational communities in FSL, however, are struggling to meet the needs of such populations. This study considered the views of 15 teacher candidates as expressed in interviews at the conclusion of their teacher education program. Through the lens of sociocultural theory, we explore the everyday and scientific conceptions developed by the teacher candidates about the aforementioned student populations. Few candidates reported learning about both student populations in their teacher education program, but nearly all worked with at least one of these student populations during their practica, possibly raising questions about the relevancy and currency of the curricula of some FSL teacher education programs. Résumé Les programmes de français langue seconde (FLS) accueillent une population de plus en plus diversifiée à cause d’une croissance du nombre d’élèves allophones et d’élèves ayant des troubles d’apprentissage. Cependant, les communautés éducatives de FLS ont du mal à répondre efficacement aux besoins de ces élèves. Cette étude a examiné les résultats d’entretiens avec 15 candidats à l’enseignement à la fin de leur année de formation universitaire. En employant une perspective socioculturelle, nous avons considéré les conceptions quotidiennes et scientifiques que les candidats ont développées envers ces élèves pendant cette période. Peu d’étudiants ont indiqué avoir appris les besoins de ces élèves au cours de leur formation universitaire, mais presque tous les participants ont travaillé avec au moins un élève provenant de ces groupes dans un programme de FLS lors de leurs stages en salle de classe. Il se peut donc que ces résultats soulèvent des questions par rapport à la crédibilité et à la pertinence des programmes de préparation à l’enseignement.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.244
GPT teacher head0.631
Teacher spread0.387 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations11
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicMultilingual Education and PolicyFrench-language works237,207