Recognition of the distinction between productivity and complexity of the \nspontaneous narrative of children enrolled in ECEC’s: Promoting children’s language development.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This theoretical proposal’s overall objectives are to describe the components of the spontaneous narrative necessary for the development of harmonious communication skills amongst unilingual and plurilingual dyads of children between the ages of 3 to 5- years-old from multi-ethnic origins and disadvantaged backgrounds enrolled in a unilingual francophone Early Childhood Education Center (ECEC). Current research suggests that attending a quality ECEC enables these children to develop language skills comparable to those of their peers (Schachter, Spear, Piasta, Justice, & Logan, 2016; \nZimmerman, Gilkerson, Richards, Christakis, Xu, Gray, & Yapanel, 2009) and to successfully enter kindergarten at age five which is one of Quebec’s educational objectives for the coming years (Ministry of Family and Seniors, 2015). Only a few researchers have examined microstructure intervention programs since the 1980s (Feffans, & Farran, 1994; Geroges-Remy, 1991; Morrow, 1985, 1986; Stadler, & Ward, 2010), yet language skills have an impact on literacy development. Indeed, children experiencing various difficulties related to oral communication, pragmatics or understimulation, are likely to experience difficulties in narrative production (Norbury, & Bishop, 2003). \n \nAnalysis of young children’s narrative development through spontaneous interaction can predict some of their difficulties when entering kindergarten; particularly with regard to the use of syntax, vocabulary, and social skills development (Bremond, 2006). The analysis of the microstructures present in children’s spontaneous narratives also allows for a detailed understanding of communication breakdowns as related to oral production and the interruption of continuing harmonious communication (Florin, 1991; Colleta, & Pellenq, 2004). Attention is thus directed towards the complexity of microstructures rather than towards productivity which would also demonstrate a more mature language development. \n \nStudies (Jones, 1998; Baranowski et al., 2003) show that learning situations arising from play create favorable conditions for the development of oral skills; including feedback, interaction, and active participation of learners. These situations also have implications \nfor other aspects of child development: cognitive, emotional, and psycho-motor skills (Garris, Ahlers, & Criskell, 2002; Shaftel, Pass, & Schnabel, 2005). In addition, research has shown that developing speaking skills and understanding is more effective in the context of games, interactive strategies, and activities which are used to promote language and \ncommunication; for example, during intentional dialogues between adult and child or in peer-to-peer conversations (Solomon, & Rhodes, 1995). \n \nBased on this theoretical proposal, a multi-year professional literacy experience with the educational staff is planned aiming to present them with the dimensions implemented in language learning in regard to the microstructure and development of a long-term teaching strategy. The Classroom Assessment Scoring System (Pianta, La Paro, & Hamre, 2005), quantifies the interactions between adult and child. This observation tool makes it possible to measure various indicators including “Instructional Support” which is the language measure that has generally received the lowest scores in previous studies. This tool primarily allows the measurement of the frequency of the interactions but does not qualitatively assess the matter. A more detailed and exploratory description suggests that consideration of the volubility of the educators and the syntactic complexity of their remarks may be correlated with these variables in children. Quality interactions initiated by educators would therefore have a favorable impact on children’s epistemic and pragmatic microstructure development.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 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 tête enseignante, 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 ».