MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2998161391

English learning lived experiences of Chinese student newcomers in a Canadian postsecondary EAP programme: The role of gender

2019· article· en· W2998161391 on OpenAlexaffabout
Chuanmei Lin, Sylvie Roy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Studies in Language
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulticulturalismPedagogyPsychologyGender studiesSecond languageIntercultural communicationSociologyLinguistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gender roles are still strictly defined in some countries while in others they are becoming increasingly fluid (McKeen & Bu, 2005). This article examines Chinese student newcomers’ English learning lived experiences in a postsecondary English for Academic Purposes (EAP) programme and how different gender roles help or hinder the integration trajectories of those students into Canadian multicultural society. In this study, women language learners who seem to follow a more traditional feminine position experience more intercultural transformations of their identities than their male counterparts with worldviews perceived as more masculine. The study shows that gender roles serve as an impacting factor on second language learning processes for Chinese women and men. We conclude that gender equality pedagogy and gender-sensitive awareness should be promoted in language teaching and learning in order to foster a more inclusive educational environment for students from diverse backgrounds who might still have traditional behaviours towards gender roles.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.456
Threshold uncertainty score0.918

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGender Studies in LanguageFrench-language works237,207