Plurilingual or not plurilingual? Plurilingual competence and identity of Canadian EAL peers in a francophone post-secondary context
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite emergent research on Canadian additional language (AL) learners’ plurilingualism in post-secondary and officially monolingual school contexts, challenges persist in implementing plurilingual instruction: learners’ plurilingual identities (PI) and plurilingual and pluricultural competence (PPC) are often ignored in favour of the monolingual native speaker model. To help validate learners’ PPC and PI in AL classrooms, this article discusses parts of the results of a mixed-methods study pertaining to the self-perceived PPC and self-reported linguistic identities of adult English as AL student tutors and tutees (N = 20) in a francophone Montréal college. Data from a PI questionnaire, a PPC scale, and interviews reveal that: tutors tend to have higher PPC and identify as bi- or plurilingual; tutees tend to have lower PPC and identify as mono- or bilingual; a lower PPC level is directly related to identifying as monolingual; factors including AL competence level influence participants’ PI. Implications for AL education are discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it