MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2546883299 · doi:10.21810/sfuer.v8i.386

How a Non-Native Speaker Constructs Positive Identities in a Master’s Teacher-Training Program in Canada

2015· article· en· W2546883299 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Jhih-Yi Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueSFU Educational Review · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDiscourse Analysis in Language Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdentity (music)Sociocultural evolutionContext (archaeology)Meaning (existential)PsychologyPedagogySociologySocial psychologyLinguisticsAestheticsHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper on how a non-native English speaker (NNES) constructs positive identities, I argue that a Master’s teacher-training program in Canada has offered me resources, support as well as space to develop my own complex identities (Norton & Toohey, 2011). Speaking from the perspectives of a NNES, I aim to encourage pre-service or in-service teachers to think positively of themselves with my personal anecdotes. I first discuss constructs of Norton & Gao’s (2008) identity and investment, and how my identity has been (re)shaped in the particular sociocultural context in a Canadian university. My investment in the current program does not just help me improve the target language, but rather increase my cultural capital. Then, I analyze Bakhtin’s dialogism (as cited in Johnson, 2014), and relate the concept to illustrate the significance of engaging myself in a dialogue with peers and professors, and how everything people say or do has a meaning in relation to others. Lastly, I address the notions of interactive others (Kettle, 2005) along with multicompetence (Cook, 1996, as cited in Block, 2003). Interactive others provide audible space for people to be heard, and how they have made a difference in my life. As a NNES, I am not a failed monolingual, but a multicompetent language user who has knowledge of not just one language in my own mind (Cook, 1996). I hope to bring positive influences on those who will enter the job market soon.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.481

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0340.011
Scholarly communication0.0080.002
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSFU Educational ReviewSame topicDiscourse Analysis in Language StudiesFrench-language works237,207