Bibliographic record
Abstract
06–235Akinjobi, Adenike (U Ibadan, Nigeria), Vowel reduction and suffixation in Nigeria. English Today (Cambridge University Press) 22.1 (2006), 10–17. 06–236Bernat, Eva (Macquarie U, Australia; Eva.Bernat@nceltr.mq.edu.au ) & Inna Gvozdenko, Beliefs about language learning: Current knowledge, pedagogical implications, and new research directions. TESL-EJ ( www.tesl-ej.org ) 9.1 (2005), 21 pp. 06–237Cheater, Angela P. (Macau Polytechnic Institute, China), Beyond meatspace – or, geeking out in e-English. English Today (Cambridge University Press) 22.1 (2006), 18–28. 06–238Chen, Liang (Lehigh U, Pennsylvania, USA; cheng@cse.lehigh.edu ), Indexical relations and sound motion pictures in L2 curricula: the dynamic role of the teacher. The Canadian Modern Language Review (University of Toronto Press) 62.2 (2005), 263–284. 06–239Cristobel, E. & E. Llurda (U de Lleida, Spain; ellurda@dal.udl.es ), Learners' preferences regarding types of language school: An exploratory market research. System (Elsevier) 34.1 (2006), 135–148. 06–240Diab, Rula (American U of Beirut, Lebanon; rd10@aub.edu.lb ), University students' beliefs about learning English and French in Lebanon. System (Elsevier) 34.1 (2006), 80–96. 06–241Frankenberg-Garcia, Ana (Instituto Superior de Línguas e Administração, Lisbon, Portugal; ana.frankenberg@sapo.pt ), A peek into what today's language learners as researchers actually do. The International Journal of Lexicography (Oxford University Press) 18.3 (2005), 335–355. 06–242Gao, Xuesong (U Hong Kong, China; Xuesong.Gao@hkusua.hku.hk ), Understanding changes in Chinese students' uses of learning strategies in China and Britain: A socio-cultural re-interpretation. System (Elsevier) 34.1 (2006), 55–67. 06–243Green, Bridget (Mukogawa Fort Wright Institute, USA), A framework for teaching grammar to Japanese learners in an intensive English program. The Language Teacher (Japan Association for Language Teaching) 30.2 (2006), 3–11. 06–244Harker, Mihye & Dmitra Koutsantoni (The Leadership Foundation for Higher Education, London, UK; mihyeharker@lfhe.ac.uk ), Can it be as effective? Distance versus blended learning in a web-based EAP programme. ReCALL (Cambridge University Press) 17.2 (2005), 197–216. 06–245Hawkins, Roger (U Essex, Colchester, UK; roghawk@essex.ac.uk ), The contribution of the theory of Universal Grammar to our understanding of the acquisition of French as a second language. Journal of French Language Studies (Cambridge University Press) 14.3 (2004), 233–255. 06–246Hinger, Barbara (U Innsbruck, Austria; barbara.hinger@uibk.ac.at ), The distribution of instructional time and its effect on group cohesion in the foreign language classroom: a comparison of intensive and standard format courses. System (Elsevier) 34.1 (2006), 97–118. 06–247Jing, Huang (Zhanjiang Teachers U/U of Hong Kong, China), Metacognition training in the Chinese university classroom: An action research study. Educational Action Research (Routledge/Taylor & Francis) 13.3 (2005), 413–434. 06–248Kapec, Peter (Fachhochschule Bonn-Rhein-Sieg, Sankt Augustin, Germany; Peter.Kapec@fh-bonn-rhein-sieg.de ) & Klaus Schweinhorst, In two minds? Learner attitudes to bilingualism and the bilingual tandem analyser. ReCALL (Cambridge University Press) 17.2 (2005), 254–268. 06–249Kervin, Lisa,Students talking about home–school communication: Can technology support this process?Australian Journal of Language and Literacy (Australian Literacy Educators' Association) 28.2 (2005), 150–163. 06–250Kwon, Minsook (Samjeon Elementary School, Korea), Teaching talk as a game of catch. The Canadian Modern Language Review (University of Toronto Press) 62.2 (2005), 335–348. 06–251Lyster, Roy (McGill U, Montréal, Canada; roy.lyster@mcgill.ca ), Research on form-focused instruction in immersion classrooms: implications for theory and practice. Journal of French Language Studies (Cambridge University Press) 14.3 (2004), 321–341. 06–252Makarova, Veronika (U Saskatchewan, Canada), The effect of poetry practice on English pronunciation acquisition by Japanese EFL learners. The Language Teacher (Japan Association for Language Teaching) 30.3 (2006), 3–9. 06–253Mckinney, Carolyn (U Witwatersrand, South Africa), A balancing act: Ethical dilemmas of democratic teaching within critical pedagogy. Educational Action Research (Routledge/Taylor & Francis) 13.3 (2005), 375–392. 06–254Morgan-Short, Kara (Georgetown U, USA; morgankd@georgetown.edu ) & Harriet Wood Bowden, Processing instruction and meaningful output-based instruction: effects on second language development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition (Cambridge University Press) 28.1 (2006), 31–65. 06–255Munro, Murray J. (Simon Fraser U, Canada; mjmunro@sfu.ca ), Tracey M. Derwing & Susan L. Morton, The mutual intelligibility of L2 speech. Studies in Second Language Acquisition (Cambridge University Press) 28.1 (2006), 111–131. 06–256Myles, Florence (U Newcastle, UK; Florence.Myles@newcastle.ac.uk ), French second language acquisition research: Setting the scene. Journal of French Language Studies (Cambridge University Press) 14.3 (2004), 211–232. 06–257Mynard, Jo & Iman Almarzouqui (Koryo College, Japan; mynardjo@hotmail.com ), Investigating peer tutoring. ELT Journal (Oxford University Press) 60.1 (2006), 13–22. 06–258Neumeier, Petra (Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Munich, Germany; petra.neumeier@lmu.de ), A closer look at blended learning – parameters for designing a blended learning environment for language teaching and learning. ReCALL (Cambridge University Press) 17.2 (2005), 163–178. 06–259Noels, Kimberly, A. (U Alberta, Canada; knoels@ualberta.ca ), Orientations to learning German: Heritage language learning and motivational substrates. The Canadian Modern Language Review (University of Toronto Press) 62.2 (2005), 285–312. 06–260Ohata, Kota (International Christian U, Tokyo, Japan; ohata@icu.ac.jp ), Potential sources of anxiety for Japanese learners of English: Preliminary case interviews with five Japanese college students in the U.S.TESL-EJ ( www.tesl-ej.org ) 9.3 (2005), 21 pp. 06–261Peltola, Maija S. (U Turku, Finland; maija.peltola@utu.fi ) & Olli Aaltonen, Long-term memory trace activation for vowels depending on the mother tongue and the linguistic content. Journal of Psychophysiology (Hogrefe & Huber Publishers) 19.3 (2005), 159–164. 06–262
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.395 | 0.268 |
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".