MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4244530217 · doi:10.1017/s0261444804242136

Language testing

2004· article· en· W4244530217 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueLanguage Teaching · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSecond Language Learning and Teaching
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLanguage assessmentListening comprehensionTest (biology)Test of English as a Foreign LanguageInterviewPsychologyChecklistForeign languageLibrary scienceActive listeningMathematics educationSociologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

04–83 Akiyama, Tomoyasu (U. Melbourne, Australia). Assessing speaking: issues in school-based assessment and the introduction of speaking tests into the Japanese senior high school entrance examination . JALT Journal (Tokyo, Japan), 25 , 2 (2003), 117–141. 04–84 Chiang, Steve (Yuan Ze University, Taiwan). The importance of cohesive conditions to perceptions of writing quality at the early stages of foreign language learning . System (Oxford, UK), 31 (2003), 471–484. 04–85 Escamilla, Kathy, Mahon, Elizabeth, Riley-Bernal, Heather and Rutledge, David (U. of Colorado, Boulder, USA). High-stakes testing, Latinos, and English language learners: lessons from Colorado . Bilingual Research Journal (Arizona, USA), 27 , 1 (2003), 25–49. 04–86 Gorsuch, Greta (Texas Tech U., USA; Email : greta.gorsuch@ttu.edu ). Test takers' experiences with computer-administered listening comprehension tests: interviewing for qualitative explorations of test validity . Calico Journal (Texas, USA), 21 , 2 (2004), 339–371. 04–87 Hardcastle, Peter. How to not test language (Part 2) . Language Testing Update (Lancaster, UK), 33 (2003), 28–35. 04–88 Hemard, D. and Cushion, S. (London Metropolitan, University, UK; Email : hemard@lgu.ac.uk ). Design and evaluation of an online test: assessment conceived as a complementary CALL tool . Computer Assisted Language Learning (Lisse, The Netherlands), 16 , 2–3 (2003), 119–139. 04–89 Ishii, David N. and Baba, Kyoko (U. of Toronto, Canada; Email : dishii@aoise.utoronto.ca ). Locally developed oral skills evaluation in ESL/EFL classrooms: a checklist for developing meaningful assessment procedures . TESL Canada Journal/Revue TESL du Canada (Burnaby, Canada), 21 , 1 (2003), 79–96. 04–90 Iwashita, Noriko and Grove, Elizabeth (University of Melbourne, Australia). A comparison of analytic and holistic scales in the context of a specific-purpose speaking test . Prospect (Sydney, Australia), 18 , 3 (2003), 25–35. 04–91 Lee, Yong-Won (Educational Testing Service, Princeton, NJ, US; Email : ylee@ets.org ). Examining passage-related local item dependence (LID) and measurement construct using Q 3 statistics in an EFL reading comprehension test . Language Testing (London, UK), 21 , 1 (2004), 74–100. 04–92 Qian, David D. (Hong Kong Polytechnic U., Hong Kong; Email : David.Qian@polyu.edu.hk ) and Schedl, Mary (Educational Testing Service, Princeton, NJ, US). Evaluation of an in-depth vocabulary knowledge measure for assessing reading performance . Language Testing (London, UK), 21 , 1 (2004), 28–52. 04–93 Rea-Dickins, Pauline (University of Bristol, UK). Classroom assessment of English as an additonal language: Key stage 1 contexts – summary of research findings . Language Testing Update (Lancaster, UK), 33 (2003), 48–53. 04–94 Rodgers, Catherine, Meara, Paul and Jacobs, Gabriel (U. of Wales Swansea, UK). Factors affecting the standardisation of translation examinations . Language Learning Journal (London, UK), 28 (Winter 2003), 49–54.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.244
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.228 · 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