MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310154237 · doi:10.3138/cmlr-2021-0073

Beyond “Sea, Sun, and Fun”: Exploring the Viability of Jamaican Creole Heritage Language Education in Toronto

2022· article· en· W4310154237 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Shawna‐Kaye D. Tucker, Victoria A. Murphy

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Modern Language Review/ La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMultilingual Education and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCreole languageHeritage languageSociologyCultural heritageGlobalizationSpace (punctuation)PedagogyHistoryLinguisticsPolitical scienceArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given heightened racial tensions as well as steadily increasing globalization and migration, the time is ripe to explore how space can be made for speakers of racialized vernaculars and languages through heritage language education. This study contributes to the limited research in this area by exploring the attitudes of individuals of Jamaican heritage in Toronto toward Jamaican Creole heritage language education and the implications of such attitudes for program offerings and design. By means of a survey and semi-structured interviews, findings showed that while valuing the language and its transmission, attitudes toward formal Jamaican Creole heritage language education were largely dismissive. Rather, greater value was placed on heritage and language education via social and community-based approaches. This study gives voice to the Jamaican community in Toronto and shows that a “one-size-fits-all approach” to heritage language education and transmission, particularly for stigmatized and non-standardized languages, is untenable.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.265

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Modern Language Review/ La Revue canadienne des langues vivantesSame topicMultilingual Education and PolicyFrench-language works237,207