Plurilingualism in Higher Education: A Collaborative Initiative for the Implementation of Plurilingual Pedagogy in an English for Academic Purposes Program at a Canadian University
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous literature on higher education suggests the inclusion of pedagogy that is linguistically and culturally inclusive in settings with increasing multilingualism, which is the case in Canada. Yet, little is known as to how the implementation of such pedagogy can take place, particularly in language programs. This article reports a researcher-instructor collaboration that aimed at implementing plurilingual practices, such as translanguaging, plurilingual identity, comparons nos langues, and intercomprehension over 4 months in an English for Academic Purposes (EAP) program at a university in Toronto, Canada. Seven EAP instructors collaborated with a researcher to implement weekly plurilingual tasks: They conducted an environment analysis, examined the logistics of implementation, and collaboratively examined the tasks. The article presents the process of implementation of the plurilingual tasks and proposes a framework for collaboration with four key elements: administrative support, openness to the use of languages other than English in class, weekly collaborative checks with the researcher, and the learner-centered nature of the tasks. Implications for the implementation of plurilingualism in English language programs in higher education are discussed. La littérature existante sur l’enseignement supérieur suggère l’inclusion d’une pédagogie linguistiquement et culturellement inclusive là où le multilinguisme est en hausse, ce qui est le cas au Canada. On sait toutefois peu de choses sur la façon dont la mise en œuvre d’une telle pédagogie pourrait s’effectuer, particulièrement dans les programmes de langue. Le présent article rend compte d’une collaboration entre une chercheuse et plusieurs professeurs qui portait sur la mise en œuvre de pratiques plurilingues comme le translangagisme, l’identité plurilingue, Comparons nos langues, et l’intercompréhension sur une période de 4 mois dans le cadre d’un cours d’anglais académique (EAP) offert dans une université de Toronto, au Canada. Sept professeurs d’anglais académique ont collaboré avec une chercheuse à la mise en œuvre de tâches plurilingues hebdomadaires, et ce, en réalisant une analyse de l’environnement, en examinant la logistique de la mise en œuvre et en collaborant à l’examen des tâches. L’article présente le processus de mise en œuvre des tâches plurilingues et propose un cadre de collaboration comportant quatre éléments clés : soutien administratif, ouverture à l’utilisation de langues autres que l’anglais en classe, contrôles collaboratifs hebdomadaires avec la chercheuse et choix de tâches centrées sur l’apprenante ou l’apprenant. Les implications de la mise en œuvre du plurilinguisme à l’intérieur des programmes de langue anglaise dans l’enseignement supérieur font l’objet d’une discussion.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it