Positioning all Students and Teachers as Intercultural Citizens— A Two-way Adaptation Approach to ELL Identity Negotiation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: This article addresses the power imbalance between English language learners (ELL) and native English speakers (NES) in culturally and linguistically diverse K-12 classrooms. Current ELL positioning models explored in empirical research studies are positioned in this article in correlation with the stages in Bennett’s theory of the Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity. The result indicates that we need an integrative model that equalizes the power relations between ELLs and NES to guide all learners and teachers towards cultural integration. Drawing on positioning theory and the concept of intercultural citizenship, this article proposes an integrative approach of positioning all students and teachers as intercultural citizens as a discursive identity negotiation means to engender an equitable two-way cultural adaption that not only challenges the raciolinguistic ideologies but also builds intercultural citizenship among all learners. A step-by-step school-level practical guide is suggested to implement this integrative approach.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".