Les Dangers de L'Utilisa Inconsidérée et Abusive du Labora Toire de Langues
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans l'etat actuel de la linguistique appliquee, le laboratoire de langues est un instrument qu'on ne devrait utiliser que pour partiquer de fa~on intensive des structures que l'on aura enseignees par ailleurs, c•est-ct-dire en classe.David Harding a decrit ainsi le r8le du laboratoire dans l'enseignement d'une langue seconde:"The period in the language laboratory has a specific purpose.It is not the time for teaching meaning, as we have seen, nor is it the time for explaining new grammatical rules or forms.We must assume that every word and every structure used in a particular period in the laboratory is already well known to the class.The purpose of the drills, as far as grammar is concerned, is to give extensive practice in the use of certain structures and in manipulating them.This experience will help to deepen the knowledge that the students have of the grammar concerned, so that this knowledge sinks down in the mind to the subconscious level of skills and habits.In the same way, language laboratory exercises in pronunciation do not explain how certain sounds are made, but save extensive practice in the use of those sounds.The laboratory is a kind of workshop where apprentices gain experience in performing those skills that have been explained to them and demonstrated before them.It follows from this that not all the language teaching will take place in the labor-.atory,there must be normal classroom work as well.Indeed effective use of the laboratory is dependent on good teaching in the classroom beforehand, and will be improved if there are adequate follow-up lessons as well."lPlus loin: "The nature of each drill would be explained and several examples from each drill would be worked orally with the class, the pupils responding in chorus to the stimulus from the teacher.At the same time the teacher would have to ensure that all the vocabulary used in drills was thoroughly known, and that the class was acquainted with the grammar underlying the drills.Then would come the third lesson of the week in the laboratory."zOn ne saurait mieux dire.Cela n'est pas nouveau d'ailleurs, et a ~t6 dit et repete ad nauseam.Malgre tout, i1 y a une tendance a lui donner dans notre enseignement une place plus grande, trop grande.Pourquoi?Historiquement, que s'est-il passe?
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 | 0.015 | 0.050 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.003 |
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".