Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This chapter discusses a short-term study abroad experience among language learners whose lexical development was measured on three different occasions (one day before departure, 12 days after arrival, and 18 days after arrival). These learners spoke English as their L1, French as their L2, and Spanish as their L3 and were currently participating in an L3 immersion experience. The study builds on Schwieter and Kunert (2012) by examining the development of lexical robustness, an important psycholinguistic aspect of global proficiency in which the greater automaticity of word retrieval is due to the familiarity with and frequency of its access (Schwieter & Sunderman, 2008, 2009). Statistical analyses exploring lexical robustness in all three languages revealed significant growth only in the L3. Further analyses demonstrated that learners with lower pre-departure L3 lexical robustness realized a significantly larger growth in L3 lexical robustness than those who began the experience with higher L3 lexical robustness. Implications for study abroad and instructor-led teaching and learning abroad initiatives are discussed.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.968 | 0.154 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".