MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2479613903 · doi:10.1057/978-1-137-49599-0_2

Québec’s Cultural Narrative and French Textbooks

2016· book-chapter· en· W2479613903 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Carol A. Chapelle

Bibliographic record

VenuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · 2016
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducator Training and Historical Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativePeriod (music)CharterSettlement (finance)SovereigntyPopulationHistoryPresentation (obstetrics)PoliticsPolitical scienceSociologyLiteratureLawArtDemographyAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter lays the groundwork for the study of Canadian and Quebec cultural content in beginning-level French textbooks used in the USA from 1960 to 2010. It explains why Quebec’s language politics is seen as interesting content for language textbooks and describes Quebec’s national cultural narrative, including events such as the French settlement of Canada, the Quiet Revolution, the Charter of the French Language, and the sovereignty referenda of 1980 and 1995. The methodology for investigating Quebec’s cultural narrative in French textbooks is explained with descriptions of the population of interest and sampling plan, the types of content to be investigated, as well as the procedures for analysis. Results summarize the quantity of images and textual presentation of Canada and Quebec in the textbooks for each of the decades finding increases in Canadian and Quebec content in beginning-level textbooks in the USA over the fifty-year period. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.122
Threshold uncertainty score0.367

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.001

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooksSame topicEducator Training and Historical PedagogyFrench-language works237,207