MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404313403 · doi:10.18806/tesl.v41i1/1399

Learning to Braid

2024· article· en· W4404313403 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Kathryn Accurso, Margaret Early, Jonathan Ferreira, Giovanna Lucci

Bibliographic record

VenueTESL Canada Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMultilingual Education and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBraidPsychologyLinguisticsPedagogySociologyMathematics educationPhilosophyHistoryArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

K-7 classrooms are diverse spaces where students and teachers navigate cultures, languages, and (racialized) identities as they engage in disciplinary teaching and learning. They are also spaces harmfully impacted by raciolinguistic ideologies and a persistent separation of language and content instruction. Consequently, critical teacher education scholarship advocates for more systematic integration of antiracism, multilingual pedagogies, and disciplinary content in preparation programs. Aligned with such calls, this critical action research project outlines how four teacher educators at a large Canadian university integrated these priorities across two mandatory courses focused on language arts and supporting multilingual learners. In turn, we ask: How did elementary teacher candidates (TCs) attempt to braid these priorities in designing read-aloud lessons? Along a continuum of learning, what characteristics distinguished more and less tightly braided attempts? Key lesson-design tasks included selecting read-aloud texts, establishing content and language objectives, planning content–language scaffolds, and reflecting on design choices. Thematic analysis of 30 small-group assignments and reflections by 122 TCs indicates that critical (disciplinary) consciousness and contextualized language supports were distinguishing features of more tightly braided lesson plans. We conclude with a discussion of these findings and their implications for teacher education knowledge, curriculum, and program design. Les salles de classe de la maternelle à la 7e année sont des espaces diversifiés où les élèves et les enseignants naviguent entre les cultures, les langues et les identités (racialisées) lorsqu’ils s’engagent dans l’enseignement et l’apprentissage d’une discipline. Ce sont également des espaces qui subissent les effets néfastes des idéologies raciolinguistiques et d’une séparation persistante entre l’enseignement de la langue et du contenu. Par conséquent, les études jetant un regard critique sur la formation des enseignants préconisent une intégration plus systématique des pédagogies antiracistes et multilingues et du contenu disciplinaire dans les programmes de formation initiale. S’inscrivant dans la lignée de ces appels, ce projet de recherche-action critique décrit la tentative de quatre formateurs d’enseignants d’intégrer ces priorités dans deux cours obligatoires axés sur l’enseignement des langues et le soutien aux apprenants multilingues au sein d’une grande université canadienne. En retour, nous posons les questions suivantes : comment les futurs enseignants au primaire ont-ils tenté d’intégrer ces priorités dans la conception de leçons de lecture à haute voix? Sur un continuum d’apprentissage, quelles sont les caractéristiques qui distinguent les tentatives d’intégration plus ou moins poussées? Les principales tâches liées à la conception des leçons comprenaient la sélection des textes à lire à haute voix, l’identification des objectifs linguistiques et de contenu, l’inclusion de l’échafaudage de contenu et de langue, ainsi que la réflexion sur les choix de conception. L’analyse thématique de 30 travaux en petits groupes et des réflexions de 122 futurs enseignants indique que la conscience critique (disciplinaire) et les supports linguistiques contextualisés étaient des caractéristiques distinctives des plans de cours qui intégraient davantage les priorités établies. Nous concluons par une discussion des résultats et de leurs implications pour la formation et les connaissances des enseignants, les programmes de formation et leur conception.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.007
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.004

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.408 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTESL Canada JournalSame topicMultilingual Education and PolicyFrench-language works237,207