The Foreign Language Classroom: Current Perspectives and Future Considerations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Modern Language Journal has long been an important venue for the publication of research and reflection on the teaching and learning of foreign languages (FL) in classroom contexts. In this article, we offer a perspective on the contemporary FL classroom, informed by a descriptive survey of all studies that took place in FL classes that were published in The Modern Language Journal ( MLJ ) between 2001 and 2014 inclusive ( N = 97). This yielded a profile of FL classrooms in terms of geographical locations, languages being taught, the amount and distribution of instructional time, and the age and language backgrounds of the students. The findings revealed that FL environments benefiting from research investigations in the MLJ typically involve older learners in on‐site (rather than virtual) classes that afford limited exposure to the FL, which was typically English (in non‐English‐speaking countries) and French, German, or Spanish (in English‐speaking countries). We consider the implications of these findings for the study of FLs in the future and identify aspects of FL classrooms that merit greater research attention as the MLJ moves into its second century.
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 | 0.016 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.020 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.002 |
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".