Mission possible: Incorporating academic literacy and readiness into an English intensive program curriculum
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Students at Canadian universities who do not meet their program-specific language and academic requirements may be admitted to their programs with a condition to enrol in an intensive language program. While, in general, university-based language intensive programs aim to help students improve their general and academic language proficiency, our focus is to specifically enhance, foster, and render visible students’ academic literacy and academic readiness. We aim to bring forth some of the intricacies and complexities of curriculum design that are embedded within current theory and practice and address needs based nuances in teaching academic English to international students. In this article, we use a multi-dimensional framework to describe a case study of an academic institution that offers an English Intensive Program. curriculum. This program allows for, inter alia, the incorporation of multiple literacies including extra curricular activities to promote the development of a wide array of academic literacies in students enrolled in the English Intensive Program. Following a description of the theoretical framework, we discuss practical implications of including theory driven academic literacies into intensive language program curricula for different stakeholders.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".