MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312116717 · doi:10.18192/olbij.v12i1.5992

Translanguaging in content and language integrated learning (CLIL): Practices in the classroom of a Chinese university

2022· article· en· W4312116717 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueOLBI Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSecond Language Learning and Teaching
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTranslanguagingContext (archaeology)Content and language integrated learningMainland ChinaExploratory researchPedagogyPsychologyMathematics educationSociologyChinaPolitical scienceForeign languageGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines translanguaging practices in a content and language integrated learning (CLIL) classroom at the tertiary level in the context of mainland China. This exploratory study investigated an Englishmedium science course, which adopted the CLIL approach, in a Chinese university. Classroom audio-recording data (130 minutes in total) was collected to investigate the situations and the purposes of the teacher’s use of translanguaging. The results of the analysis show that the teacher uses translanguaging to provide background knowledge, deepen students’ understandings, improve teaching efficiency, engage students, and ensure classroom interactions. Implications for translanguaging in CLIL at the tertiary level are also discussed in this study.

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)0.000
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 score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.218 · 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