MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7133545005 · doi:10.48336/264

Interactions between learning English and studying drama: an autoethnography of being a drama student in an English-language context

2025· other· en· W7133545005 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yusi Cai

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2025
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDramaAutoethnographyContext (archaeology)MulticulturalismExperiential learningLanguage acquisition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a multicultural, plurilingual, and welcoming environment like Canada, there is a continuous demand for English as an Additional Language (EAL) learning. In this context, pedagogical approaches should be carefully chosen to reflect learners? traits and cross-cultural experiences. This thesis examines the relationship between drama education and language learning, aiming to offer insights and inspiration for EAL educators and learners, drama practitioners, and individuals residing in multicultural settings, such as Canada. Autoethnography is employed as the methodology. The analysis draws on the researcher?s personal experiences as both an EAL learner and a drama student living in Canada. By analyzing the researchers? personal experiences alongside relevant literature, this thesis examines how the interaction between drama and language education can be most effectively realized. It argues that this integration is particularly valuable for EAL learners who are interested in drama and are learning with non-native-English speakers from diverse cultural backgrounds.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.012
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.331 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MIND→French-language works237,207→