MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2608642965 · doi:10.3138/cmlr.3549

Breathing Life into New Speakers: Nsyilxcn and Tlingit Sequenced Curriculum, Direct Acquisition, and Assessments

2017· article· en· W2608642965 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sʔímlaʔx Michele K. Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Modern Language Review/ La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMultilingual Education and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousCurriculumTask (project management)Indigenous languageProcess (computing)Endangered speciesLinguisticsCritically endangeredComputer sciencePsychologyPedagogySociologyEngineeringEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many Indigenous languages are critically endangered and faced with the urgent need to create parent-aged advanced speakers. This goal requires sequenced curriculum, effective teaching methods, students being supported to spend more than 2,000 hours on task, and regular assessments. In response to this urgent need the author followed a proven direct acquisition method and curricular design developed for Nsyilxcn and Interior Salish languages and wrote two beginner Tlingit textbooks and their accompanying teaching manuals. The author piloted the Tlingit textbooks with a cohort and developed a filmed assessment process. This article shares results of filmed assessments for Nsyilxcn and Tlingit, implemented by beginner and intermediate speakers. Recommendations are made for Indigenous language revitalization, including assessment methods appropriate to critically endangered Indigenous languages and strategies to create advanced speakers.

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)0.007
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.602
Threshold uncertainty score0.792

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.350 · 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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Modern Language Review/ La Revue canadienne des langues vivantesSame topicMultilingual Education and PolicyFrench-language works237,207