MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Learning Language and Culture Through Intercultural Online Exchange

2013· book-chapter· en· W7108666818 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Canadian institutionsFrancophone University Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntercultural communicationMeaning (existential)Computer-mediated communicationSociocultural evolutionStudy abroadQualitative researchLanguage acquisitionSecond languageFirst languageValue (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This chapter presents a study in which native speakers of French in Quebec, Canada interacted through computer-mediated communication (CMC) with non-native speakers in British Columbia, Canada over the course of one university semester. The goal of the study was to describe the value and characteristics of an intercultural exchange as a language practice in regards to language development, intercultural learning, and sociolinguistic development for L2 learners. This chapter presents the results of the first two aspects studied. The data included transcripts of text-based chat discussions and of an online written group forum, pre- and posttest questionnaires, and one-on-one interviews. Drawing on the sociocultural perspective, this study used a qualitative approach to analyze the collected data. The results suggest that this type of exchange fosters the creation of a collective meaning that allowed L2 learners to participate in meaningful interactions and to increase their level of confidence. Finally, the exchange allowed participants to experience the dimension of “culture as individual” (Levy, 2007), an aspect of culture that encouraged them to share their personal views on culture and to connect on a personal level with their native speaker partners.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.142
Threshold uncertainty score0.283

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning→French-language works237,207→