MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2900266551 · doi:10.5539/res.v10n4p148

The Effect of Professional Development on Multilingual Education in Early Childhood in Luxembourg

2018· article· en· W2900266551 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Claudine Kirsch, Gabrijela Aleksić

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of European Studies · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistic Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultilingualismProfessional developmentMedical educationEarly childhoodPsychologyDiversity (politics)Quality (philosophy)PedagogyEarly childhood educationMultilingual EducationSociologyDevelopmental psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While multilingual programmes have been implemented in early childhood education in several countries, professionals have shown to be unsure of how to deal with language diversity and promote home languages. Therefore, there is a need for professional development. The present article discusses the outcomes of a professional course on multilingual education in early childhood delivered to 46 early-years practitioners in Luxembourg. Using a questionnaire administered prior to and after the course as well as interviews, we examined the influence of the training on attitudes to multilingual education and activities to develop Luxembourgish and home languages. The analysis drew on content analysis, paired samples t-test and correlational analysis. The findings show that the course positively influenced the professionals’ knowledge about multilingualism and language learning, their attitudes towards home languages, their interest in organising activities in the children’s home languages and the implementation of these activities. The results shed light on special interest areas such as the quality of input that future professional development courses could focus on.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations47
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of European StudiesSame topicLinguistic Education and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207