MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2569152339 · doi:10.7202/1038276ar

Éveil aux langues et évolution des représentations d’élèves plurilingues sur leur répertoire linguistique

2016· article· fr· W2569152339 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Marie‐Paule Lory, Françoise Armand

Bibliographic record

VenueAlterstice Revue internationale de la recherche interculturelle · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFrench Language Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Même si les bénéfices d’une éducation plurilingue sont largement documentés, la diversité linguistique et culturelle ne fait pas toujours l’objet d’une valorisation par le système scolaire. À Montréal notamment, où la diversité linguistique est prégnante, les élèves plurilingues sont susceptibles de vivre, à des degrés divers, des rapports de force entre les langues qui les entourent. Il semble que le système éducatif québécois promeuve aujourd’hui encore prioritairement, voire uniquement, la langue et la culture de la majorité. C’est pour cette raison qu’au moyen de l’implantation d’activités pédagogiques d’éveil aux langues nous avons étudié, sur deux ans, les représentations de cinq élèves plurilingues scolarisés en fin de cycle du primaire sur les langues de leur répertoire linguistique. Plus particulièrement, les résultats de la recherche qualitative présentés dans cet article s’articulent autour de trois dimensions qui ont participé à la dynamisation des répertoires linguistiques des participants à la recherche : le temps, le contexte et les interlocuteurs.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.131
Threshold uncertainty score0.261

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.167
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations22
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlterstice Revue internationale de la recherche interculturelleSame topicFrench Language Learning MethodsFrench-language works237,207