Estudos sobre aprendizagem colaborativa em língua estrangeira: relações de pesquisa no contexto brasileiro e canadense.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Partimos dos estudos canadenses desenvolvidos por Swain (2000), Swain e Lapkin (1994, 2001) e Swain e Tocalli-Beller (2005) para discutir conceitos da teoria sociocultural que envolvem a condução dessas pesquisas e de outras realizadas no contexto brasileiro, influenciadas pelas investigações referidas. A noção que interliga todos esses estudos é a de aprendizagem colaborativa, a qual pode ser definida como um conjunto de eventos interacionais que favorecem a interação dialógica entre aprendizes, criando ocasiões que promovem a aprendizagem da língua estrangeira.Résumé: Nous sommes partis des études canadiennes de Swain (2000), Swain et Lapkin (1994, 2001) et Swain et Tocalli-Beller (2005) pour discuter les concepts de la théorie socioculturelle qui orientent des recherches en ce domaine et dans d’autres champs dans le contexte brésilien, sous l’influence des auteurs cités. La notion qui interlie toutes ces études est celle de l’apprentissage collaboratif laquelle peut être définie comme un ensemble d’actions qui favorisent l’interaction dialogique entre les apprenants, tout en créant des moments qui promeuvent l’apprentissage de la langue étrangère.Mots-clés: apprentissage des langues; dialogue; collaboration.Abstract: Based on the studies conducted by Swain (2000), Swain and Lapkin (1994, 2001), and Swain and Tocalli-Beller (2005), our purpose is to discuss principles of the sociocultural theory which underlie these investigations and those developed in Brazil, having the research in the Canadian context as a starting point. All the studies mentioned here have the notion of collaborative learning as a connecting concept. Collaborative learning is understood as a series of interactional events which favour the dialogical interaction between learners, creating occasions that promote foreign language learning.Keywords: language learning; dialogue; collaboration.
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 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.000 |
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".