(Im)mobility, literacies and second language education for adults and adolescents with limited previous education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This special issue draws attention to literacy and basic literacy education for adult and adolescent migrants with limited or no previous school background, who are learning a second language. This introduction addresses issues closely related to literacy education for this group of migrants, namely human mobility and immobility, including both horizontal (geographical and spatial) and vertical (social) mobility, as well as the interrelation between the two. Whereas some people’s mobility is considered a threat that must be regulated and restricted, other people’s mobility is encouraged. While mobility and diversity have always been intrinsic aspects of human societies, it can be concluded that social, economic and technological changes have intensified migration, the movement of artifacts and communication between people over vast distances. As mobility and diversity have increased, theoretical perspectives and research in applied linguistics and education have emerged. In this special issue, we bring together seven studies of second language and literacy education for adolescent and adult second language learners in different contexts, illustrating both similarities and differences between educational domains. The studies were conducted in Canada, Norway and Sweden. We are happy to say that the authors’ efforts have resulted in a body of work that contributes to research on literacies and literacy education for adults and adolescents with limited previous education. It is also our hope that the articles will inspire additional research in the area in the coming years.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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".