MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999663116 · doi:10.18192/olbiwp.v10i0.3822

Translanguaging and Multilingual Texts as a Resource in Superdiverse Classrooms

2020· article· en· W2999663116 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lena Schwarzl, Eva Vetter

Bibliographic record

VenueOLBI Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistic Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTranslanguagingSocioemotional selectivity theoryGermanEthnographyIntervention (counseling)LinguisticsMultilingualismSociologyClass (philosophy)PedagogyFocus (optics)PsychologyMathematics educationComputer scienceDevelopmental psychologyAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This contribution draws on the preliminary results of a project that uses translanguaging and plurilingual texts during an intervention (of six months) in one primary and one lower secondary school class in Vienna. Although Viennese pupils’ linguistic repertoires are highly diverse, pupils usually barely get a chance to use their respective repertoires at school, because of a focus on highly prestigious languages, such as German or English. We assumed that pupils would positively experience the use of their plurilingual competences to gain self-efficacy. Moreover, we expected that group dynamics would improve due to the use of translanguaging. Results of the ethnographic observations and interviews we conducted with one teacher at each school at the end of the intervention are discussed in this article. They support the conclusion that school classes that are linguistically diverse benefit from intervention at the socioemotional level. However, it is crucial that teachers pay particular attention to the integration of less dominant languages. Keywords: translanguaging pedagogy, plurilingual texts, linguistic superdiversity, self-efficacy, dominant languages

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)0.003
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOLBI JournalSame topicLinguistic Education and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207