MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Integrating Service-Learning in Korean Language Education: Three Case Studies

2025· article· en· W7164317124 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yujeong Choi

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Korean Language in America · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicService-Learning and Community Engagement
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgency (philosophy)Experiential learningReflection (computer programming)Professional developmentLearner autonomyLanguage acquisitionLanguage educationSecond languageReciprocal

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT This study reports three pilot implementations of Community-Based Language Learning (CBLL) in advanced Korean language education at the University of Toronto between 2023 and 2025. The cases were designed to examine the feasibility and pedagogical value of integrating community-connected experiential learning into advanced-level curricula. The first case involved a student serving as a teaching assistant (TA) in a credit-bearing high school Korean language course. The second case examined three university students who worked as TAs in an intensive summer Korean language camp for secondary school learners, where they designed instructional materials and led tutorial sessions. The third case explored a remote, project-based collaboration with the Toronto office of the Korea Creative Content Agency (KOCCA), where a student produced a professional research report on the Canadian media industry entirely in Korean. Drawing on instructor observations and student reflection surveys, this study analyzes learning outcomes, affective factors, and implementation challenges across the three cases. Findings indicate that CBLL participation fostered pedagogical language use, intercultural awareness, and professional communication skills, as well as increased learner confidence, while also revealing challenges related to student anxiety, assessment design, and coordination of reciprocal community partnerships. The results demonstrate the feasibility of CBLL in advanced Korean programs.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.339 · 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 venueThe Korean Language in AmericaSame topicService-Learning and Community EngagementFrench-language works237,207