[학술논문] The Challenge of Elementary School English Education in Korea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the present study is to compare the bilingual experience in the U.S. and Canada with the current elementary school English program in korea and attempt to gain insights which may help enhance the quality of the elementary school English program in the future. Since its inception in 1968, the national bilingual education effort in the U.S. has been essentially intended to provide a temporary bridge for non-English speaking children into an all-English curriculum, thereafter abandoning their native languages. The English program in Korean elementary schools was first introduced in 1997 in an effort to promote internationalization and prepare for expected communication needs in the internationalized age. Although their basic premises are different, the ultimate goal for learners in both countries is to successfully master the English language. Careful reviews of a variety of programs in the U.S. over the past 30 years have provided us with both positive and negative aspects of what a bilingual approach can do in a context where sufficient English input prevails. An understanding of these results may help facilitate and enhance the quality of English program in the EFL context where virtually no English input is available apart from the classroom use of the target language.
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 | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.066 | 0.016 |
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".