Perspectives on Struggling English Language Learners: Case Studies of Two Chinese-Canadian Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chinese learners are often stereotyped as high achievers and overlooked in literacy research. This year-long, qualitative study in a combined Grade 4/5 classroom presents the cases of two struggling Chinese-Canadian learners. The study offers a new perspective on struggling learners by revealing a complex, multilayered understanding of these learners from different social members' viewpoints. I provide detailed descriptions of these learners' literacy experiences and dispositions of learning at school and at home, and their teachers' and parents' perspectives on their struggles with English literacy. The findings suggest that several home and school cultural discontinuities and pedagogical influences contributed to the children's difficulty with literacy. The discontinuities included (1) parents' preference for word-by-word decoding versus teachers' preference for semantic connections between pages, (2) parents' and teachers' different interpretations of what and how much homework should be given, (3) parents' and teachers' perspectives on the causes of the children's low literacy performance, and (4) lack of communication between the school and home. The pedagogical influences included (1) decontextualized literacy activities and lack of direct instruction, (2) instructional materials that were detached from the learners' cultural backgrounds, (3) insufficient recognition and utilization of students' resources in their first language, and (4) problematic assessment of these learners. The study raises critical issues in understanding the multivoicedness concerning struggling English language learners and provides educators with guidance for effective instructional planning and for building school-parent partnerships.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.036 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".