MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Implicit Curriculum

2018· other· en· W2993181592 on OpenAlexaff
Guofang Li, Seonmin Huh

Bibliographic record

VenueThe TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching · 2018
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Studies in Language
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumIdeologySocializationCurriculum theoryMathematics educationPedagogyAffect (linguistics)NormativeSociologyPsychologyCurriculum developmentPolitical scienceSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

English as an international language (EIL) is not free from ideologies and worldviews that accompany the dominant English language. There are many underlying implicit curricula (such as L1 user norms, English‐only instruction, gender, class, or racial ideologies) that are being taught and learned, often unrecognized by the language learners, while learning the English language. These implicit curricula of various types of discrimination, socialization, and unstated rules, when accepted without question, can affect success in language learning and teaching. While previous studies have exposed various dimensions of the implicit curriculum in EIL, current research focuses on complex interconnectedness of different linguistic, cultural, social, and individual factors that are shaped and are shaping the implicit curriculum in and out of EIL classroom settings. Future research must be devoted to more explicit investigation of the impact of intersectionality of implicit curricula on language teaching and learning and to more innovative pedagogical practices that can disrupt such impact.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.140

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0420.007

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language TeachingSame topicGender Studies in LanguageFrench-language works237,207