MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2495538722 · doi:10.1075/aals.9.07ch4

Chapter 4. Skill Acquisition Theory and the role of practice in L2 development

2013· book-chapter· en· W2495538722 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueAILA applied linguistics series · 2013
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSecond Language Learning and Teaching
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDreyfus model of skill acquisitionSecond-language acquisitionConjunction (astronomy)Differential effectsContext (archaeology)Knowledge acquisitionComputer scienceProcedural knowledgePsychologyKnowledge managementCognitive psychologyLinguisticsKnowledge-based systems

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter presents an overview of research in support of Skill Acquisition Theory and the claim that contextualized oral practice in conjunction with feedback promotes continued second language growth. Skill acquisition is explained as a gradual transition from effortful use to more automatic use of the target language, with the ultimate goal of achieving faster and more accurate processing. By reviewing different yet compatible theoretical orientations of knowledge representations (e.g., implicit/explicit knowledge, exemplar-based/rule-based representations), the interplay between declarative and procedural knowledge is explained as bidirectional and relative to the context of instruction. The differential effects of guided practice and communicative practice are addressed and their benefits in conjunction with feedback are highlighted through reference to classroom-based second language acquisition (SLA) research. Finally, future directions regarding research on practice effects and types of practice are suggested.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.792
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.190 · 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