MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3048003484 · doi:10.1177/1056787920913245

A Canadian Perspective: French Language Learning

2020· article· en· W3048003484 on OpenAlexaffabout
Thomas G. Ryan, Erhan Sinay

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Educational Reform · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMultilingual Education and Policy
Canadian institutionsNipissing University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAttritionPerspective (graphical)AP French LanguageGovernment (linguistics)PedagogySociologyMathematics educationPsychologyPolitical scienceMedical educationLanguage educationMedicineComputer scienceLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Canada, language learning is viewed as an international, national and local need. Herein an international perspective is provided that guides the reader into a National language perspective which is uniquely Canadian. For instance, within Ontario there are concerns about French language education and the multiple entry points for students and inequities in most school boards in Ontario. The fact that School Boards across the province have identified the supply and demand for Ontario elementary and secondary teachers as variable especially in certain subjects such as French Language is unsettling. Future recruitment needs to cast a wide net and move deep into Faculties of Education in a proactive manner. Having the necessary French teachers and support staff is very important yet the need to retain students and educators in French programs is equally essential since retention and attrition rates impact program viability. Recent history in Ontario Core French (CF) programs demonstrate reduced enrollments over time therefore the government of Ontario has acknowledged a need to increase FSL student retention via improved access, training, relationships and special programs, to ensure students are enrolled and retained as long as possible.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.862
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.432 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Educational ReformSame topicMultilingual Education and PolicyFrench-language works237,207