Bibliographic record
Abstract
Starting from a justification of explicit approaches to grammar teaching, this article discusses grammar materials used within a hybrid learning context at the Open University in the United Kingdom and the cognitive principles reflected in their design. The authors argue that as part of a socio-cognitive theoretical approach, explicit form-focussed grammar instruction is not only desirable but may also be essential to meet the diverse needs of students within any language learning context. Since the Covid pandemic, the pedagogical landscape has changed, with more organizations offering hybrid approaches to language learning. In such contexts, the authors argue that the more “explicit” the online component of the blend, the more likely it is to facilitate “noticing,” which is one essential component of the development of grammatical competence. The authors draw on a cognitive linguistic framework and their own research to support the importance of explicit grammar pedagogy, prior to providing examples of grammar materials developed for language students at different levels at the Open University. They conclude by suggesting that the cognitive principles reflected in the design of these materials can be applied to any language learning context and may therefore be useful not only to language educators in Canada but also to teacher developers. Partant d’une justification des approches explicites de l’enseignement de la grammaire, cet article examine le matériel pédagogique grammatical utilisé dans un contexte d’apprentissage hybride à l’Open University au Royaume-Uni et les principes cognitifs reflétés dans sa conception. Les auteurs soutiennent que, dans le cadre d’une approche théorique sociocognitive, l’enseignement explicite de la grammaire centré sur la forme n’est pas seulement souhaitable, mais qu’il peut aussi être essentiel pour répondre aux besoins diversifiés des apprenants dans n’importe quel contexte d’apprentissage des langues. Depuis la pandémie de Covid, le paysage pédagogique a changé et de plus en plus d’institutions proposent des formules hybrides d’apprentissage des langues. Dans de tels contextes, les auteurs soutiennent que plus la composante en ligne de la formule est « explicite », plus elle est susceptible de faciliter la « prise de conscience », qui est une composante essentielle du développement de la compétence grammaticale. Les auteurs s’appuient sur un cadre linguistique cognitif et sur leurs propres recherches pour soutenir l’importance d’une pédagogie grammaticale explicite, puis ils fournissent des exemples de matériel pédagogique grammatical développé pour des apprenants de langues de différents niveaux à l’Open University. Ils concluent en suggérant que les principes cognitifs reflétés dans la conception de ce matériel peuvent être appliqués à n’importe quel contexte d’apprentissage des langues et peuvent donc être utiles non seulement aux enseignants de langues au Canada, mais aussi aux formateurs d’enseignants.
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 | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".