MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2297813731 · doi:10.14288/1.0104984

An experimental study of two methods of teaching oral French

2011· article· en· W2297813731 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas Joseph Brighouse

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study is an examination of the effectiveness of a method of teaching French phonics at the junior high school level and its effect in reducing the dangers of using the printed word from the beginning of language study. Fifty-two grade IX students with no previous experience of French were taught a specially written ten week course using the mimicry-memorization method of learning sentence patterns in French. One group, the "two impression" group, studied this material with only oral-auditory stimuli, seeing only the English equivalent of the French they were expected to know. The other group, the "four impression" group, learned the same material by the oral, auditory, visual and kinesthetic stimuli since from the first lesson they saw and copied the French spelling after doing oral auditory drill. Special care was taken in drilling the latter group in the French orthographic system and in its phonetic basis. Students were expected in this way to "overlearn" the unit on French phonics in an attempt to reduce the English-type mispronunciation that could be expected. From the two groups were selected matched pairs using the following criteria for purposes of matching: first, I.Q.; secondly, the current year's grades on the June examinations in English language, Science, Mathematics and Social Studies; and lastly musical aptitude. Groups had equal number of boys and girls. Tests were administered in auditory comprehension, in oral translation from English into French, and in pronunciation of French. A comparison of the means at the end of the ten week course showed a slight difference in favour of the two impression group in auditory comprehension and in favour of the four impression group in oral translation and pronunciation. None of these differences was significant at the 5% level. The analysis of type and number of errors in the pronunciation test showed that those who saw the French had slightly more errors of pronunciation which seemed to be caused by interference from the English orthographic system. There were twice as many errors of this type in the four impression group as in the two impression group. These mistakes represented only six per cent of the total number of mistakes made. It was noted that those who had seen no French spelling still tended to mispronounce some French words in an English way. It is concluded that the overlearning of French phonics appeared to have overcome what disadvantage might be expected to accrue from the teaching of French using the written word from the beginning.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)→Same topicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning→French-language works237,207→