MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7062822249

The use of French L1 in English L2 secondary school classrooms in Quebec

2015· dissertation· en· W7062822249 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2015
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle Detector Development and Performance
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrammarMeaning (existential)Perspective (graphical)NegotiationPoliticsPerceptionFrenchSecond language
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Teaching English as a Second Language (ESL) in Quebec has its own particularities due to language laws and its geographical position, i.e. that it is a French province surrounded by English--speaking provinces within a federally bilingual country.This study investigates the reasons why ESL teachers use the French (L1) language (which is shared by all the students and teachers in this study) in ESL classrooms in Quebec, although it is prescribed to use English (L2) as the language of instruction.This study investigates the matter from two different standpoints: the linguistic perspective as well as the socio--cultural and political perspectives.For this study, nine secondary school students and two ESL teachers were initially interviewed, then observed in the classroom, and interviewed after observation to get a more in--depth perception of why and when they use French (L1) and English (L2) in the classroom.The interviews and observations were audio--recorded, transcribed and thematically analyzed to identify emerging themes amongst teachers and students.After the themes were analyzed, the results were found to be consistent with previous research, in which teachers used the L1 to explain grammar and complicated concepts, to discipline, for classroom management, and to clarify tasks.The political and socio--cultural perspectives revealed that although Quebecois students said they wanted to speak more English and have stricter rules about speaking French in class, they are still not ready to take on native--like English speech.They also can't help but fall back on French when working in groups, negotiating meaning or during off--task behavior.Some students also have confidence issues when it comes to expressing themselves, especially if they feel less proficient than their bilingual peers.i i 4.2.7.Using English in ESL class 74 4.2.8.The English--only rule in class 76 4.2.9.Final reflections on L1 and L2 use in the ESL classroom 78 5. DISCUSSION 78 6. CONCLUSION 93 7. REFERENCES 97 8. APPENDICES political issues are involved when using the first language (L1) in the ESL classroom in Quebec?Student teachers in the Bachelor of Education in Teaching English as a Second Language (B.Ed.TESL) program at McGill University are told that ESL students should be exposed to as much English as possible and that such exposure will certainly help them be effective within their own teaching of ESL classes.However, it seems that both new teachers and experienced teachers are not always aware of the implications of interacting with everyone exclusively in English, in other words using an "English only" policy in the classroom.Similar to many other countries or regions, Quebec has a history of controversial language laws that have shaped the province throughout the years.In a place -the province of Quebec -that is surrounded by English speakers in both Canada and the neighboring United States, there is a constant struggle to preserve and value the French language.In a case like this, what exactly is our role, as ESL teachers, among Francophone students?Some articles (e.g., May, 2005; Oakes, 2004) and books (e.g., Oakes, 2007) have exploredthe topic of language minority rights, language policies and struggles, specifically in Quebec.In the thesis, I expand on the subject and make it more relevant for ESL teachers in Quebec.In carrying out this study, I was interested in asking secondary school students, as well as ESL teachers, about their opinions, interpretations and perspectives when it comes to using French in the ESL classroom.I chose to investigate this issue with the data I would collect from interviews, discussions and observations with these populations.The adolescent age

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.174

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.219 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Same topicParticle Detector Development and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207