Exploring the “situation” of situational willingness to communicate: A voluntary youth exchange perspective. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics / Revue canadienne de linguistique appliquée
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents the perspectives of youth participating in the Society for Educational Visits and Exchanges in Canada’s Volunteer Youth Experience (VYE) as gathered by way of pre- and post-program questionnaires, observations, interviews, and journals. The pan-Canadian questionnaire results suggest that this short, bilingual volunteer experience enhances participant motivation to learn a second official language and to be part of the target community. Triangulated findings from observations, interviews and journals indicate that participants’ willingness to communicate (WTC) in the second language (MacIntyre, Dörnyei, Clément, & Noels, 1998) may have been influenced by situational factors inherent to the volunteer experience such as access to native speakers of the target language and opportunities for authentic community participation. Résumé Cet article présente les points de vue de jeunes ayant participé au programme Expérience bénévole jeunesse (EBJ) de la Société éducative de visites et d’échanges au Canada (SEVEC), tels qu’ils ont été obtenus au moyen de questionnaires pré- et post-échange, d’entrevues et de journaux de bord. Les résultats pancanadiens du questionnaire suggèrent que cette brève expérience bilingue de travail bénévole augmente la motivation des participants envers l’apprentissage d’une deuxième langue officielle et leur sentiment d’appartenance à l’égard de la communauté locutrice de la langue cible. La triangulation des résultats des entrevues et de ceux des journaux de bord indique que le désir de communiquer (WTC, pour Willingness To Communicate) dans la langue seconde (MacIntyre, Dörnyei, Clément et Noels, 1998) a pu être influencé chez les participants par des facteurs circonstanciels inhérents à l’expérience de bénévolat, comme le contact avec des locuteurs natifs de la langue cible et l’occasion de participer de façon authentique à la vie de la communauté.
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 | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".