THE INFLUENCE OF PERSONALITY TYPE ON FOREIGN LANGUAGE LEARNING: A CRITIQUE OF THE ACCELERATIVE INTEGRATED METHOD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Accelerative Integrated Method (AIM) is an inductive approach to second language acquisition. It was developed in Canada in 1999 by Wendy Maxwell to teach French in primary school. The AIM is currently being used to teach also English, Spanish, Mandarin and Japanese in over 10,000 primary and secondary schools in the world. The method privileges meaning-making and effective communication through a gesture approach. Maxwell claims that the AIM allows learners to reach high levels of communicative proficiency quickly, mainly through an emotional engagement with the language that they learn through dance, drama and creative writing. This paper critically evaluates the AIM; it focuses on how much it draws and impacts on the learner’s personality. It also explores the appropriateness of the AIM for secondary school students who have a higher cognitive developmental age than primary students for whom the AIM was originally designed. The discussion is informed by theories on second language acquisition, emotion and personality type. The paper concludes by making recommendations on learning and teaching methodologies that can challenge and successfully engage foreign language learners while also developing in them intercultural literacy.
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 | 0.181 | 0.278 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".