MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3206078760 · doi:10.11575/ajer.v67i1.56703

Research Mobilization in TESL Learning Communities: Benefits, Challenges, Supports, and Procedures

2018· article· en· W3206078760 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

VenueUniversity of Calgary · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSecond Language Learning and Teaching
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProfessional developmentPedagogyPsychologyReading (process)Focus groupHumanitiesMedical educationLibrary scienceSociologyPolitical scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To enhance English as a second language (ESL) instructors’ understanding and utilization of peer-reviewed research for professional learning and development, we facilitated the establishment of and supported professional reading groups in nine adult ESL programs. We examined the benefits and challenges experienced by the 76 participants over five years, through focus group interviews, audio-taped group discussions, and monthly questionnaires. Analyses revealed that, despite the challenges reported, reading group involvement promoted reflection, confirmed current professional practices, fostered learning, impacted practice, emphasized the importance of professional development, and encouraged networking. Strategies for establishing and maintaining effective professional reading groups in ESL programs are provided. Key words: Professional Learning and Development; Professional Reading Groups; Research Utilization; Adult English as a Second Language (ESL) Education; Communities of Practice; TESL Pour augmenter, chez les enseignants d’anglais langue seconde (AL2), la compréhension et l’utilisation de la recherche examinée par des pairs dans le cadre de l’apprentissage et de la formation professionnels, nous avons facilité la création de groupes professionnels de lecture et appuyé leur emploi au sein de neuf programmes d’ALS pour adultes. Par des entrevues avec des groupes de réflexion, des discussions de groupe enregistrées et des questionnaires mensuels, nous avons étudié les avantages et les défis vécus par les 76 participants au cours de cinq ans. Les analyses ont démontré que malgré les défis signalés, la participation au groupe de lecture a favorisé la réflexion, confirmé les pratiques professionnelles actuelles, encouragé l’apprentissage, influencé la pratique, souligné l’importance du développement professionnel et encouragé le réseautage. Nous fournissons des stratégies pour l’établissement et le maintien de groupes professionnels de lecture efficaces au sein des programmes d’ALS. Mots clés : Apprentissage et développement professionnels; groupes professionnels de lecture; utilisation de la recherche; anglais langue seconde (ALS) pour adultes; communautés de pratique; TESL

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.141
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.200 · 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