MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386137107 · doi:10.3406/ranam.2009.1378

Pluralisme culturel, plurilinguisme et citoyenneté. Quelques perspectives comparées sur l’enseignement des langues en Europe et au Canada

2009· article· fr· W4386137107 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gwendolyne Cressman

Bibliographic record

VenueRecherches anglaises et nord-américaines · 2009
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMultilingual Education and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceSociologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pluralisme culturel, plurilinguisme et citoyenneté. Quelques perspectives comparées sur l'enseignement des langues en Europe et au Canada Cet article aborde de façon comparée les politiques linguistiques au Canada et au sein de l’Union européenne. A travers deux modèles, qui se décrivent d’une part comme ‘multiculturel’ et d’autre part comme ‘multilingue’, il s’agit, plus précisément, d’explorer les politiques d’enseignement à l’égard des langues issues de l’immigration. L’approche sociolinguistique mise en avant vise à mettre en perspective l’écart entre les discours sur le pluralisme linguistique et les pratiques mises en œuvre pour l’intégration et la reconnaissance de ces langues au sein des écoles secondaires de la Colombie britannique et des écoles européennes. L’étude de ces politiques linguistiques révèle des conceptions de la citoyenneté qui, tout en développant une conception utilitariste des langues, courent le danger de ne constituer au final qu’une forme plus ou plus déguisée d’assimilationnisme linguistique.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.186
Threshold uncertainty score0.374

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0180.031
Scholarly communication0.0150.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.155
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRecherches anglaises et nord-américainesSame topicMultilingual Education and PolicyFrench-language works237,207