Creating Multimodal Reflections in an IEP Speaking-Listening Course
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reflection is a crucial element in service-learning and having English as a second language (ESL) students create multimodal reflections on their service-learning experience helps them develop multiliteracies and results in learning that is authentic and meaningful as students engage in social discourse while they develop their academic language and digital skills. Research indicates that integrating multimodal projects in ESL courses has the capacity to promote collaboration and learner autonomy, and improve motivation, self-confidence, and language skills. That said, the purpose for integrating multimodality should be clear, and explicit teaching, scaffolding, monitoring, and feedback are necessary for success. In addition, there are challenges to address. In this article, procedures for creating multimodal reflections using Adobe Spark are explained with reference to learners in an Intensive English Program (IEP) service-learning context, and suggestions are shared on how teachers of all levels can adopt and modify the project for different contexts. Challenges are discussed and assessment tools are presented. La réflexion étant un élément essentiel du domaine de l’apprentissage par l’expérience axé sur la communauté, il est important que les apprenantes et apprenants d’anglais langue seconde (ESL) créent des réflexions multimodales sur leur expérience d’apprentissage par l’expérience pour les aider à développer des littératies multiples et à acquérir des connaissances authentiques et significatives au moment où ils se socialisent en développant leur expression académique et leurs compétences numériques. Les recherches indiquent que l’intégration de projets multimodaux dans les cours d’anglais langue seconde a le pouvoir de favoriser la collaboration et l’autonomie des apprenantes et apprenants en plus d’en améliorer la motivation, la confiance en soi et les compétences linguistiques. Cela dit, l’objectif de l’intégration de l’intermodalité doit être clairement établi, et le succès de l’entreprise dépendra du caractère explicite de l’enseignement, de l’échafaudage, du suivi et de la rétroaction. Qui plus est, il y a des défis à relever. Dans le présent article, les procédures liées à la création de réflexions multimodales à l’aide d’Adobe Spark sont expliquées en lien avec les apprenantes et apprenants dans un contexte d’apprentissage par l’expérience dans le cadre d’un programme intensif d’anglais (IEP), et des suggestions sont partagées sur la manière dont les enseignantes et enseignants de tous les niveaux peuvent adopter et modifier le projet afin de l’adapter à divers contextes. Des défis sont discutés et des outils d’évaluation sont présentés.
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 | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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".