"Bilingual Always": A Study of Second Language Writing's Influence on Writing Studies in the Canadian Association for the Study of Discourse and Writing/Redactologie
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A neoliberal agenda has driven the evolution of internationalization in Canadian Higher Education since the early 2000s. This agenda positions translingual, visa students as human capital and influences educational policy particularly for writing classes and writing instruction. My research asks what pre-existing, cross-disciplinary partnerships between second language writing and writing studies exist to support translingual, visa students in the modern Canadian writing classroom. This article reports findings from archival research exploring the cross-disciplinary history of writing studies and second language writing as this history manifested in one of Canada’s two writing studies organizations: the Canadian Association for the Study of Discourse and Writing/Redactologie (CASDW), formally known as the Canadian Association of Teachers of Technical Writing (CATTW). This history reveals writing studies as a decentralized discipline that utilized resourcefulness and resilience to reach across disciplinary lines in order to establish itself as a full-fledged field in a Canadian context.
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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".