MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2744364605 · doi:10.17161/iallt.v41i1.8485

ESP for Busy College Students

2011· article· en· W2744364605 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Agnieszka Palalas

Bibliographic record

VenueIALLT Journal of Language Learning Technologies · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSecond Language Learning and Teaching
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceClass (philosophy)Flexibility (engineering)Language acquisitionMultimediaMathematics educationPsychologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research conducted at George Brown College in Toronto identified a significant gap between students’ language proficiency, the requirements of the program from which they were about to graduate, and the language requirements of the related workplace. Specific language and socio-cultural competencies had to be packaged into a language support solution in a delivery format matching students’ needs and their demanding schedules. Based on these needs, an adjunct language support course was designed following paradigms of computer-assisted language learning (CALL) and Mobile-Assisted Language Learning (MALL) theories of learning. The resulting hybrid English for Special Purposes (ESP) course comprised three components: in-class, online, and mobile. Traditional ESL resources were combined with in-house produced audio-video podcasts and open source content. Results demonstrated that blending in-class, online and mobile language learning is an effective solution for teaching English to adult learners, and it is a solution that enables improved flexibility and individualization of practice.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.171
Threshold uncertainty score0.572

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1710.042

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations15
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIALLT Journal of Language Learning TechnologiesSame topicSecond Language Learning and TeachingFrench-language works237,207