MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901234674 · doi:10.1515/applirev-2018-0071

Transforming faces: Supporting second language learners studying speech-language therapy in global contexts

2018· article· en· W2901234674 on OpenAlexaff
Nancy Bell

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Linguistics Review · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnglish languageGeneral partnershipFocus (optics)Computer sciencePsychologyLanguage assessmentSpeech-Language PathologyMedical educationPedagogyLinguisticsMathematics educationMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Transforming Faces project is a partnership of speech-language therapy (SLT) educators and practitioners that is co-creating a computer-based series of lecture modules for use in Low Middle Income Countries (LMICs). The initial series of lectures is in English, for use by English speaking instructors and students whose first language is not English. Making the technically challenging and content-specific language of the lectures more accessible and comprehensible to students was the focus of this study. A review of literature from three areas of language learning led to recommendations for consideration in the development of the computer-based lectures modules, and the subsequent piloting of the modules in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Following the three-week pilot project, analysis of feedback from the instructor and the students resulted in a number of recommendations for the continued development and implementation of the dysphagia lectures, as well as potential future SLT courses in other global contexts.

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)0.003
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.293 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Linguistics ReviewSame topicEFL/ESL Teaching and LearningFrench-language works237,207