A Review of “Next level grammar for a digital age: Teaching with social media and online tools for rhetorical understanding and critical creation”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Next level grammar for a digital age by Darren Crovitz, Michelle D. Devereaux, and Clarice M. Morgan has made a valuable contribution to English Language Arts (ELA) education by delineating how grammar instruction can be situated within real-life contexts using digital technologies and media, as well as emphasizing the importance of critical digital literacy in ELA education. The book provides educators with a wide range of approaches to guide students in utilizing language in digital spaces and understanding rhetorical grammar to create digital content, aiming to raise learners to become more conscious digital readers and writers and to grow up to be engaged citizens. With its concrete and practical lesson ideas, the book helps language teachers to prepare for teaching complex and challenging topics that emerge in digital realms and to guide students to incrementally develop their literacy skills. Individuals in language education will find valuable insights for engaging discussions on how language teaching can be updated to meet requirements of an increasingly digital media landscape.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".