Introduction: Literacies and autonomy of the advanced language learner
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present volume contains ten articles related to the literacies and autonomy of the advanced language learner, which was the overarching theme of the 2014 CCERBAL Conference organized by the OLBI and hosted by the University of Ottawa. This theme was implemented in various ways and within various scholarly domains during the conference, representing work related to the main pillars of the OLBI’s expertise: language teaching, language policy, language assessment and technology-enhanced language learning. Similarly, the articles in this issue revolve around these core areas and represent a diversity of perspectives generated by both established researchers and emerging scholars. Some of the articles draw on completed research projects, others report on work in progress or pilot studies, and still others are based on pedagogical workshops. This mix of approaches and perspectives exemplifies the dynamic nature of the field and is indicative of the vibrant research and teaching culture fostered by the OLBI and its research centre, the CCERBAL. The volume is introduced by a lead article, and the rest of the submissions are divided into two sections: Research and Pedagogical Perspectives. The Research section contains articles based on empirical studies, while the Pedagogical Perspectives section contains articles based on reflections on classroom practices or teaching workshops. Some of the articles contain elements from both categories, which highlights the interconnectedness and, in some cases, fusion of research and practice. This invites us to pause for a moment and rethink some of the traditional lines that we are used to drawing in conceptualizing scholarly communication.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.004 |
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".