Acquisition of Literacy in Bilingual Children: A Framework for Research
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Much of the research that contributes to understanding how bilingual children become literate is not able to isolate the contribution of bilingualism to the discussion of literacy acquisition for these children. This article begins by identifying three areas of research that are relevant to examining literacy acquisition in bilinguals, explaining the contribution of each, and associating each type of research with a skill required by monolingual children in becoming literate. Three prerequisite skills for the acquisition of literacy are competence with the oral language, understanding of symbolic concepts of print, and establishment of metalinguistic awareness. A review of the literature explores the extent to which these skills that influence literacy acquisition in monolinguals develop differently for bilingual children. The conclusion is that the relation between bilingualism and the development of each of the three skills is different, sometimes indicating an advantage (concepts of print), sometimes a disadvantage (oral language competence), and sometimes little difference (metalinguistic concepts) for bilingual children. Therefore, bilingualism is clearly a factor in children's development of literacy, but the effect of that factor is neither simple nor unitary. Since the publication of this article, our research has continued to explore the themes set out in this framework and provided more detail for the description of how bilingualism affects the acquisition of literacy. Two important advances in this research are the finding that some aspects of reading ability, notably phonological awareness, are rooted in general cognitive mechanisms and transfer easily across languages, whereas others, such as decoding, are more language dependent and language‐specific and need to be relearned with each new writing system ( Bialystok, Luk, & Kwan, 2005 ). Second, writing systems and the differences between them have a greater impact on children's acquisition of literacy than previously believed. Not surprisingly, this relation has been found for emerging ability with phonological awareness ( Bialystok, McBride‐Chang, & Luk, 2005 ) but, more surprisingly, has recently been shown to have a subtle influence on children's emerging concepts of print ( Bialystok & Luk, in press ). The interpretation that bilingualism must be considered in terms of both advantages and disadvantages has also been pursued in studies of cognitive and linguistic processing in adults. Recent research has shown that adult bilinguals display disadvantages on tasks measuring lexical retrieval and fluency ( Michael & Gollan, 2005 ) but advantages on tasks assessing cognitive control of attention ( Bialystok, Craik, Klein, & Viswanathan, 2004 ). This approach leads to a more detailed and, ultimately, more accurate description of how bilingualism affects cognitive performance.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,027 | 0,011 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,011 | 0,008 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,006 | 0,041 |
| Communication savante | 0,015 | 0,021 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,010 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,006 | 0,006 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».