MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2921791303 · doi:10.15760/etd.6546

Adult ESL Students: Traits and Goals - A Case Study

2000· report· en· W2921791303 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David Wilkinson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender and Technology in Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMainstreamMedical educationVocational educationCommunity collegePsychologyAcademic yearMathematics educationPedagogyMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study was conducted to examine the traits and goals of students enrolled in the ESL program at Clark College in Vancouver, Washington over the past two academic years (1992 and 1993). The study looks at the degree of awareness that these students have of further educational opportunities in the academic and vocational areas, and the degree to which the ESL program at Clark College engenders this awareness. Data was collected from two cohorts of students enrolled in the ESL program on two separate occasions, each approximately one year apart. The goals of the study included the following: ( 1) gathering background data for the students attending the ESL program; (2) collecting information regarding students' past and present knowledge of computer technology; (3) awareness of the financial aid programs available; (4) future goals in the areas of education and employment. Comparison of the responses from the two cohorts provides instructors and administrators a clear picture of the students they are serving and provides the rationale for providing the material and logistical support required to allow ESL students to enter into mainstream programs at the community college level.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.467
Threshold uncertainty score0.965

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.380 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGender and Technology in EducationFrench-language works237,207