Ontario’s Revised French as a Second Language Curricula: Reflections on Culture Teaching and Oral Proficiency Development in Core French
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ontario's Ministry of Education has recently redesigned two French as a second language (FSL) curricula in the elementary [1] and secondary [2] teaching panels.This curriculum shift requires a thorough and ongoing investigation to determine how teachers perceive Ministry modifications and how they plan to implement such changes in daily practice. This paper summarizes initial curriculum reactions and implementation strategies of the 2013 [1] and 2014 [2] Ontario FSL curricula through a Master's thesis [3] and personal practitioner-teaching experiences with the Core French Program. It also outlines an overview of future doctoral-level research that will build on the previous elementary-level research project [3].Curriculum, culture, and interculture as concepts are defined through a specific vantage point as a newly-licensed FSL non-native French teacher.This article presents a brief overview of Ontario FSL education, reflecting the curriculum revision process.As a returning Ontario FSL secondary school teacher, curriculum change is then described and reflected upon with a personal researcher-practitioner stance through a metaphorical conceptual framework of a French salad.Initial conclusions establish that the Ontario FSL curriculum revision process is overall positive for student acquisition of French language and cultures, but that teachers may require ongoing practitioner development to effectively implement the new curricula.Suggested future research seeks to explore how the various definitions of this article are lived in the unique Ontario FSL community, as well as how the revised curricula [1-2] continue to be implemented in daily practice by the curriculum user.
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 | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".