MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2754520222

From Exclusion to Inclusion: Meeting the Needs of Struggling Learners in the Primary Level French Immersion Classroom

2014· article· en· W2754520222 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kristen H. Lisowski

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSecond Language Learning and Teaching
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInclusion (mineral)French immersionMathematics educationPedagogyPsychologySocial psychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The French Immersion program is popular in many school boards across Canada, but the attrition of learners experiencing difficulty has often been criticized. While the suitability of the program for all learners has been questioned, an emerging body of research suggests that this practice runs counter to a philosophy of inclusion and that students with diverse learning needs can be successful in immersion programs. This qualitative study explores the insights and perceptions of three practicing classroom teachers and one teacher educator who described their experiences working with struggling learners in the primary level French Immersion classroom. While some participants described having observed exclusionary practices, they all believed that everyone should be able to try French Immersion. Some nevertheless understood the program to be a better fit for some students than for others. Analysis of both the existing research and the data collected through this study suggest that the social and emotional well-being of a student plays a critical role in identifying and supporting struggling learners through differentiated instruction and in making decisions regarding their placement in the program.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0150.008
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0020.012
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicSecond Language Learning and TeachingFrench-language works237,207