From Peanut Butter to Eid … Blending Perspectives: Teaching Urdu to Children in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The focus of this article is to examine the notions of language learning, heritage (referring to tradition) and ancestry (descendants & properties passed on), and cultural identification for Urdu-speaking immigrant children now living in Canada. This article provides a detailed ethnographic account of an innovative language program developed to teach Urdu to children within the Canadian context. The author draws on the research of Taylor (1983) Taylor, D. 1983. Family literacy: Young children learning to read and write, Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. [Google Scholar] to show that the evolution of literacy transmission is highly dependent on the childhood experiences of individual educators and evolves through the interplay of their unique biographies and educative styles, including the use of various texts. Questions explored include the following: What types of texts are used? What are the students' reactions to the texts? What are the teacher's practices within the classrooms? What kind of an impact does the learning of Urdu have on the identity construction of these children?
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".