Perceived Effectiveness of Romanian-French Tandems within the Tandems Linguistiques Project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper analyzes the effectiveness of Romanian-French tandem interactions according to the perception of a group of participants in the Tandems Linguistiques project organized by "Iuliu Haţieganu" University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj-Napoca, Romania, with the support of the Agence Universitaire de la Francophonie.A total number of 40 feedback forms completed by undergraduate French and Romanian students enrolled in the project between 2012 and 2014 were analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively.The aim was to establish the overall impact of the project in line with the core principles of tandem language learning, as well as the obstacles, benefits and strategies employed by the participants, including their preferred methods of corrective feedback.Comparisons between the perceptions of the two groups of native students were also drawn.The results showed that the tandem project was perceived as a positive experience by most French and Romanian participants.The most frequently mentioned benefits were linguistic (vocabulary, pronunciation and grammar), followed by cultural benefits and human-level gains.Difficulty scheduling sessions, different levels of language proficiency resulting in an uneven use of the two languages and communication breakdown were the most frequently reported obstacles.The extra work carried out by the students in addition to the recommended worksheets was the most frequently reported learning strategy as well as the main benefit from a teaching perspective.The various ways of providing corrective feedback confirmed the multimodal character of this important activity within tandem interactions as well as the autonomy and resourcefulness of the investigated participants.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".