Perceptions of ESL Program Management in Canadian Higher Education: A Qualitative Case
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ESL programs at post-secondary institutions must often generate revenue in addition to teaching students English. Institutions often impose explicit expectations on these programs to generate profit, creating unique challenges for those who administer them. This qualitative case study investigated challenges faced by ESL program directors at one university in Canada. Semistructured interviews were used to collect data from program directors ( N = 3) on topics relating to administration, marketing, the mandate to generate revenue, and the complexities of ESL program legitimacy and marginalization in higher education contexts. Five key themes emerged from the data: (a) the necessity for directors to be highly qualified and multilingual, as well as have international experience; (b) a general lack of training, support, and resources for program directors; (c) institutional barriers such as working with marketers and recruiters with little knowledge of ESL contexts; (d) program fragmentation and marginalization on campus; and (e) reluctance to share information and program protectionism. Findings point to the need for increased training and support for ESL program directors, along with the need for institutions to elevate the profile of these programs so they are not viewed as having less value than other academic programs on campus. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.16.9.2
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it