MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403222989 · doi:10.47862/apples.130459

Teaching materials for use in French classes for immigrants enrolled in Literacy Education and Second Language Learning for Adults in Quebec

2024· article· fr· W4403222989 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueApples - Journal of Applied Language Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFrench Language Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationLiteracyMathematics educationPedagogyPsychologySociologyMedical educationMedicineGeographyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le personnel enseignant travaillant avec les personnes adultes immigrantes en apprentissage de la langue et de la littératie (PAIALeL) est confronté à plusieurs défis concernant la disponibilité et l’utilisation de matériels didactiques. Pour dresser le portrait du matériel utilisé dans les classes de français pour PAIALeL au Québec (Canada) et mieux comprendre les différents enjeux liés à l’utilisation de ce matériel, nous avons interrogé des enseignant·e·s en utilisant un questionnaire en ligne (n=53) et des entrevues individuelles (n=7). Nos données, analysées à l’aide de la théorie de l’activité (TA) révèlent un manque de matériel adéquat ainsi que des enjeux liés à l’adaptation et à la création de matériel ainsi qu’à l’hétérogénéité des profils des PAIALeL. Des implications pédagogiques sont aussi présentées. Teachers working in the field of literacy education and second language learning for adults (LESLLA) face several challenges related to the availability and use of appropriate teaching materials. To provide an overview of the materials used in Quebec’s French L2 classes and to better understand the challenges related to these materials, we collected data from teachers both through an online questionnaire (n=53) and individual interviews (n=7). Analysed through the lens of Activity Theory (AT), our data highlight a lack of suitable materials and issues related to the heterogeneity of students’ background. Pedagogical implications are also presented.

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.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.383
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.348 · 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