MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7161832408 · doi:10.82308/48326

Academic biliteracy and identity construction : case studies of Francophone science writers

2002· dissertation· en· W7161832408 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Guillaume Gentil

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMultilingual Education and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFrenchAppropriationIdentity (music)LiteracyAcademic writingNeuroscience of multilingualismEnglish for academic purposesSocial practiceFamily literacy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This inquiry explores how eight young francophone scientists within anglophone and francophone postsecondary institutions in Montreal and Paris developed academic literacies in English and French, and constructed identities as members of national, linguistic, academic, and socio-cultural groups. I define literacy development as an individual's development of writing competencies and appropriation of language and social practices in and around written texts within specific socio-cultural, interactional, and discursive contexts. I adopt a socio-cultural, hermeneutic approach to literacy and identity to propose an integrated model of academic biliteracy development and identity construction inspired by Bakhtin, Halliday, Ricoeur, Taylor, and Vygotsky. To understand how the participants engaged in academic literacy practices and constructed identities in their academic writing, I conducted 50 hours of autobiographical and text-based interviews about their writing, life plans and experiences, and sense of self as writers and learners, over three years. I also paid visits to the participants' homes and workplaces, and collected documents such as legal texts, university statutes, and national census data so as to situate the participants' texts and experiences within their autobiographical, institutional, historical, and societal contexts. Through selected excerpts from interviews, documents, and writing samples, I argue that the participants' academic biliteracy development and identity construction was shaped by their individual evaluative responses to social forces. I suggest the shared individual and collective responsibilities of scientists, language specialists, academic gate keepers, universities, and governments for the advancement of academic literacies in more than one language. I draw implications of this inquiry for academic biliteracy, instruction and research in bilingual academic writing, and the theoretization of writers' identiti

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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 score0.139
Threshold uncertainty score0.276

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0330.012
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0030.003
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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.529
Teacher spread0.446 · 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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMultilingual Education and Policy→French-language works237,207→