MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4320519818 · doi:10.1017/9781139042710.013

Teacher Preparation and Nonnative English-Speaking Educators

2009· other· en· W4320519818 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

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSecond Language Learning and Teaching
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFirst languageLinguisticsLanguage assessmentForeign languageEnglish languageVariety (cybernetics)PsychologyLanguage proficiencyMathematics educationPedagogyComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION Nonnative English-speaking (NNES) educators constitute a large majority of English as a second or foreign language teachers around the world (Canagarajah 1999). However, it is only recently that they have become more visible and that the field of teaching English to speakers of other languages (TESOL) has begun to address issues that are of concern to them. Although there is wide agreement that the terms native and nonnative speaker are impossible to define (Kaplan 1999) and that they “obviously and pointlessly dichotomise the world neatly into ‘us’ and them” (Kaplan 1999: 5), the reality is that “teachers who are perceived as speaking a language other than English as their mother tongue – regardless of their actual proficiency with English – are typically labelled as ‘nonnative English speakers’” (Pasternak and Bailey 2004: 156). This chapter focuses on NNES educators in relation to issues of language teacher preparation programs. SCOPE AND DEFINITIONS It could be argued that work on NNES teachers-in-preparation has focused on two different broad themes related to the setting in which language teacher-education programs are offered. Specifically, the first theme deals with issues of teacher language proficiency in relation to language teacher-preparation programs. With some exceptions, this line of work has been the focus of attention in teacher-preparation programs for / in English as a foreign language (EFL) settings (e.g., Barnes 2002; Berry 1990; Chacon 2005; Cullen 1994, 2002; Lavender 2002; Murdoch 1994, etc.). Work on issues of language proficiency draws on the notion that “a teacher’s confidence is most dependent on his or her own degree of language competence” (Murdoch 1994: 258); therefore, it deals with language as a skill that needs to be improved for a teacher to be a successful professional. The second theme has mainly focused on issues of teachers-in-preparation in Inner Circle settings, where English is the dominant language (U.S., U.K., Canada, Australia, New Zealand); therefore, it may not be surprising that work in this area has dealt with how NNES teachers-in-preparation socialize into their language education programs in these countries, how they perceive themselves in relation to their English-speaking peers, and how they develop a sense of professional identity (e.g., Brutt-Griffler and Samimy 1999; Golombek and Jordan 2005; Morita 2004; Thomas 1999; Pavlenko 2003, etc).

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.460
Threshold uncertainty score0.948

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0520.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Quick stats

Citations34
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSecond Language Learning and TeachingFrench-language works237,207