MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952626323 · doi:10.18192/jpds-sjpd.v2i1.3152

Elitist, Inequitable and Exclusionary Practices: A Problem within Ontario French Immersion Programs? A Literature Review

2019· review· en· W2952626323 on OpenAlex
Lauren Delcourt

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueActes du Symposium JEAN-PAUL DIONNE Symposium Proceedings · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMultilingual Education and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBest practiceReputationCurriculumNeuroscience of multilingualismPsychologyPedagogyElitePublic relationsMedical educationPolitical scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 2013 Ontario French Second Language (FSL) Curriculum emphasizes inclusivity and bilingualism; however, many students are recommended to opt out of French Immersion (FI). The opting-out of students may support the strengthening of the program by establishing a reputation of success, but how does it affect the withdrawn child? Are FSL programs using best practices to support all learners equitably, or catering to the elite students as a result of misconceptions, lack of resources and professional training? To address these questions, an exploratory and focused literature review of Canadian publications, Ministry of Education documentations and global articles on the topic of bilingualism was conducted, focusing on the works of Genesee (2007) and Baker (2006) on natural language acquisition, Arnett and Mady (2017) on teachers’ and parents’ perspectives, and Gour (2015) and Wise (2012) who report on misconceptions regarding second language education. Emerging trends indicate that elitist practices and unequal access to FSL programs remain a prominent issue in Ontario classrooms. With the understanding that students with learning disabilities (LDs) can succeed in the FI program, removing these learners may in turn, be a disservice to their overall learning. Findings presented in this paper support the need to examine how learners’ abilities are being perceived by educational professionals to provide the necessary tools and supports for success, appropriate training to mitigate misconceptions, as well as retain a reputation for success in FSL programs through equitable means. Acknowledging such discrepancies between what serves as best teaching practice and making it possible in the classroom is necessary to reduce excuses of unpreparedness to meet students’ diverse needs and initiate reflection and training programs that prepare teachers to teach inclusively to all.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.761
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.385
Teacher spread0.326 · 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