Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper argues that the English Language Program (ELP) at International Christian University has a unique historical opportunity to identify itself as an English for Liberal Arts program and to promote a new paradigm of language teaching. It locates the ELP within the institutional mission of International Christian University, provides both broad and narrow definitions of what that identification means, and undertakes a paradigmatic archaeology of the ELP to explore the sedimentary layers of language teaching—such as the audio-lingual method, the content-based approach, and the EAP model—that underlie its curriculum and self-conception. The paper identifies aspects of an English for Liberal Arts approach to language teaching already present in the curriculum, and points to areas where pedagogy and curriculum should be re-defined or re-formulated in this new light. This paper was originally presented as an address in the Lectures on Language and Linguistics Series at International Christian University on January 24, 2006 and has special significance as the English Language Program (ELP) will be renamed the English for Liberal Arts Program (ELA) in April of 2012.
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 | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.025 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".