Plurilingualism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article outlines a literature review of the current anglophone academic literature pertaining to plurilingualism. We summarize 24 of the most pertinent articles in terms of resistance to the adoption of plurilingual pedagogy; key factors in changing attitudes toward the approach; identified classroom options; and implications for teacher education. To us, it is clear that plurilingualism can make a difference in terms of facilitating gains in linguistic abilities, strengthening student self-confidence, and addressing issues related to social justice. Conceptually, language should be linked to multiple repertoires and identities that are living entities rather than things to be mastered. However, concrete institutional policy and material supports are key. We do note that much work within the previous literature also problematized decontextualized and standardized orientations toward language, especially in terms of the erroneous notion of the “native speaker.” Through this literature review, however, we argue that plurilingualism can potentially deepen this trend and add valuable conceptual insights and contribute to concrete pedagogical change as long as the concerns of classroom teachers arerespected. Thus, it is not completely a case of plurilingualism amounting to being “old wine in new bottles.” Cet article présente une revue de la littérature scientifique anglophone actuelle sur le plurilinguisme. Nous résumons 24 des articles les plus pertinents sur le plan de la résistance à l’adoption d’une pédagogie plurilingue, des facteurs clés du changement des attitudes à l’égard de l’approche plurilingue, des options identifiées d’implantation en salle de classe ainsi que des implications pour la formation enseignante. Il est clair pour nous que le plurilinguisme peut faire une différence en facilitant l’acquisition de compétences linguistiques, en renforçant la confiance en soi des apprenants et en s’attaquant aux enjeux de justice sociale. D’un point de vue conceptuel, la langue devrait être liée à de multiples répertoires et identités qui constituent des entités vivantes plutôt que des objets à maîtriser. Cependant, des politiques institutionnelles concrètes et du soutien matériel sont essentiels. Nous constatons que de nombreux travaux dans la littérature existante ont également problématisé les orientations décontextualisées et standardisées envers la langue, notamment en ce qui concerne la notion erronée de « locuteur natif ». Dans le cadre de cette revue de littérature, nous soutenons toutefois que le plurilinguisme peut potentiellement accentuer cette tendance, apporter des éclairages conceptuels précieux et contribuer à des changements pédagogiques concrets, à condition que les préoccupations des enseignants soient respectées. Ainsi, l’enjeu du plurilinguisme ne se résume pas au fait de « mettre du vieux vin dans de nouvelles bouteilles ».
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".