MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391756267 · doi:10.7577/hrer.5282

Supporting language rights: plurilingual pedagogies as an impetus for linguistic and cultural inclusion

2024· article· en· W4391756267 on OpenAlexaffabout
Rebecca Schmor, Enrica Piccardo

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Rights Education Review · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSecond Language Learning and Teaching
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForegroundingInclusion (mineral)MultilingualismCitizenshipPedagogySociologyLinguisticsPrivilege (computing)General partnershipDemocracyPolitical scienceHuman rightsSocial sciencePoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores how the concept of plurilingualism is positioned to act as an impetus for linguistic and cultural inclusion in human-rights-based language education. Drawing on frameworks foregrounding descriptors for plurilingualism and democratic citizenship, the paper employs discourse analysis and sorting techniques to identify and align strategies of linguistic and cultural inclusion found in multimodal plurilingual task artefacts collected from a multi-year, multi-site research partnership between a Canadian university and the Italian Ministry of Education. The findings reveal that the implementation of plurilingual tasks aligns with key elements of democratic, rights-based language education, including critical understanding of communication, openness to cultural otherness, cooperation skills, and the valuing of cultural diversity. The findings of this paper contribute to further understanding of the concept of plurilingualism and to empirically informed perspectives on pedagogies that support language rights as human rights in education.

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 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 categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.964
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.409
Teacher spread0.375 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Rights Education ReviewSame topicSecond Language Learning and TeachingFrench-language works237,207