MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012904234 · doi:10.1177/1477878509104325

Self-determination and bilingualism

2009· article· en· W2012904234 on OpenAlexaff
Rodrigue Landry, Réal Allard, Kenneth Deveau

Bibliographic record

VenueTheory and Research in Education · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMotivation and Self-Concept in Sports
Canadian institutionsUniversité Sainte-AnneUniversité de MonctonCanadian Linguistic Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuroscience of multilingualismPsychologyAutonomyCompetence (human resources)Bilingual educationLiteracyMinority languageLinguisticsPedagogySocial psychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article focuses on additive bilingualism for minority group children, more specifically the development of strong literacy skills in English and in the children's language. The personal autonomization language learning (PALL) model is presented. It specifies eight testable hypotheses. Self-determination theory (SDT) is central in the PALL model. It is argued that autonomy support in both languages is related to basic needs satisfaction (autonomy, competence, relatedness: ACR) which is in turn related to internally regulated motivation for learning the language. Owing to the strong social attraction of English, the model proposes that favouring the learning of the minority language and basic needs satisfaction in that language foster additive bilingualism because of the strong interlinguistic transfer of minority language competencies and of an internal motivational orientation. Self-determination to learn the minority language and minority literacy skills seems to transfer across languages. Research results support the model; these are summarized and educational implications are discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.502
Threshold uncertainty score0.278

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.402 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations25
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTheory and Research in EducationSame topicMotivation and Self-Concept in SportsFrench-language works237,207