MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2293942340 · doi:10.18192/olbiwp.v7i0.1355

Introduction: Literacies and autonomy of the advanced language learner

2015· article· en· W2293942340 on OpenAlex
Nikolay Slavkov

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueOLBI Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSecond Language Learning and Teaching
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutonomyTheme (computing)Learner autonomySociologyPedagogyDiversity (politics)Section (typography)Field (mathematics)Engineering ethicsLanguage educationComputer sciencePolitical scienceComprehension approachEngineeringWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.206 · 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