MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Role of Intermediary Language at the Lessons of Russian as a Foreign Language in the Context of a Present-Day University

2020· article· en· W3017211324 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePrepodavatel XXI vek · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicForeign Language Teaching Methods
Canadian institutionsFields Institute for Research in Mathematical Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForeign languageContext (archaeology)LinguisticsLanguage assessmentLanguage industryRussian languageComputer scienceLanguage transferLanguage educationComprehension approachPolitical scienceSociologyPedagogyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article considers the feasibility of using the intermediary language in Russian as a foreign language lessons with students of the English department. It is concluded that at the initial stage of training, an intermediary language is necessary: it performs a number of important functions, allows a comparative analysis of language phenomena, and helps to overcome interference. Thus, for a teacher of Russian as a foreign language, good command of the English language becomes a necessary professional skill, and the creation of new nationally oriented teaching aids in Russian as a foreign language is one of the main tasks of the modern methodology of teaching foreign languages. The article also presents the results of a survey of 178 foreign students on the most relevant aspects of the problem being studied.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.298 · 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