MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2937873360 · doi:10.2478/rpp-2019-0004

Academic English as a Component of Curriculum For ESL Students (Foreign Experience)

2019· article· en· W2937873360 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueComparative Professional Pedagogy · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSecond Language Learning and Teaching
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSyllabusVocabularyCurriculumForeign languageMathematics educationActive listeningPedagogyEnglish for academic purposesTest of English as a Foreign LanguageDisciplineReading (process)Academic yearHigher educationPsychologySociologyLanguage educationPolitical scienceLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract It has been substantiated that Academic English must be an integral component of ESL students’ study at foreign languages departments to achieve success as professionals and be ready to realize themselves in a demanding world of today. We have defined the main problem on the way to it, namely the insufficient provision of the Academic English discipline in curricula of foreign language departments or its absence. The necessity to elaborate a syllabus for Academic English discipline being taught throughout all the course of study has been substantiated. Educational programs of Academic English in a number of foreign educational establishments of Great Britain, the USA, Canada and Australia have been analyzed and their defining features have been outlined. Strategies and conditions for effective teaching of Academic English have been characterized. It has been defined that in general, in spite of slight differences in the topics covered by different EAP programs, all of them are aimed at: developing strategies and vocabulary for reading and understanding academic texts; finding, understanding, describing and evaluating information for academic purposes; developing active listening and effective note-taking skills; building on language skills to describe problems and cause-and-effect; gathering a range of information, using the skills learned, to integrate it into a written report; engaging in peer-to-peer feedback before finalising one’s piece of academic work. Requirements for students’ achievements at the end of the course have been determined. As a basis for Academic English syllabus elaboration has been chosen a course by M. Hewings and C. Thaine (upper-intermediate and advanced levels). On its basis we have defined units to be covered by the course as well as skills to be developed. Recommendations as to better and more efficient teaching of the discipline have been outlined.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.266
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0050.000

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.345 · 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