MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6990783090

Elementary Teachers’ Perspectives on their Level of Preparation to Teach English Language Learners in their Regular Classroom

2016· other· en· W6990783090 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace (University of Toronto) · 2016
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEllPreparednessEnglish languageEnglish-language learnerScope (computer science)English as a second languageSample (material)Work (physics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

English Language Learners (ELLs) are students who are learning English as the language of instruction, while simultaneously learning academic content. As elementary teachers now commonly have ELLs in their regular classrooms, the range of unique needs possessed by those students has drastically changed the demands on instructors in terms of their preparedness to teach ELLs. According to the scope of literature, the effectiveness of Ontario faculties of education preparing teachers to work with ELLs remains unclear. The present research study focused on the perspectives of a small sample of elementary teachers with regards to their level of preparedness to teach ELLs in the Greater Toronto Area. Through semi-structured interviews, one English as a Second Language (ESL) instructor and one Early Childhood Educator (ECE) shared their experiences of having taught ELLs. Findings indicate that there is a crucial need to better prepare future elementary teachers to work with ELLs.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.179
Threshold uncertainty score0.356

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace (University of Toronto)French-language works237,207