Student Motivation, Identity and Investment Construction in French Immersion Studies at the University of Ottawa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AbstractThis article focusses on the motivating factors behind the decision of first-year students in the French Immersion Studies (FIS) program at the University of Ottawa to continue their immersion studies at a university level, how they experience their studies within this program, and how this experience impacts their identity and investment in French language and culture. The findings presented are part of a study that demonstrates the positive influence that parents, teachers and relevant extracurricular experiences have on students’ decision to continue their immersion studies as well as the transformations of the students’ identity construction and investment which are enhanced through the FIS program, the bilingual environment which surrounds it, and students` activities.Keywords: motivation, identity, investment, French Immersion Studies RésuméCet article porte sur les facteurs qui ont motivé des étudiants en première année d’études à s’inscrire au programme du Régime d’Immersion Française (RIF) de l’Université d’Ottawa afin de poursuivre leurs études en immersion au niveau universitaire, leurs expériences dans ce programme ainsi que l’impact que ce programme a sur leur identité et investissement dans la langue et la culture françaises. Les résultats présentés font partie d’une étude qui montre l’influence positive des parents, enseignants, et expériences pertinentes hors programme sur la décision des étudiants de continuer leurs études en immersion ainsi que la transformation associée à leur construction identitaire à l’augmentation de leur investissement à la suite de participation dans le programme RIF, l’environnement bilingue qui l’environne et les activités des étudiants. Mots -clés : motivation, identité, investissement, Régime d’Immersion Française
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".