Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’uptake est la réponse immédiate de l’apprenant suite à la rétroaction de l’enseignant (Lyster & Ranta, 1997). Cette étude investigue la relation entre l’uptake et l’apprentissage des déterminants possessifs et des questions d’anglais L2. Elle examine aussi l’effet des reformulations implicites et explicites en termes d’uptake et d’apprentissage. Deux classes intensives (ESL) de sixième année du primaire (N=53) à Montréal ont participé à cette étude. Les deux classes ont été réparties en deux groupes : reformulations explicites et reformulations implicites. L’intervention comportait des activités communicatives. Les élèves ont été testés sur les formes cibles immédiatement avant et après le traitement pédagogique en utilisant des taches orales. Les résultats ont confirmé l’effet supérieur des reformulations explicites en termes d’uptake et d’apprentissage et que l’effet des reformulations dépend de la cible. Cette étude a montré aussi que l’uptake peut faciliter l’apprentissage et que son absence n’est pas signe de manque d’apprentissage.
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 | 0.008 | 0.060 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 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".