Meetings without Dialogue: A Study of ESL Parent-Teacher Interactions at Secondary School Parents' Nights.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research in home–school communication has incorporated little, to date, about participation by English as a second language (ESL) parents. This arti � cle examines the communication processes between recent Chinese immigrant parents and Canadian teachers at secondary school Parents’ Nights. Drawing from observations of three annual Parents’ Nights, interviews with teachers and bilingual assistants who acted as interpreters for parents, and focus groups, this study revealed that teachers and parents held conflicting expectations of Parents’ Night. Such a mismatch of expectations could make their communi� cations difficult even before meeting at Parents’ Night. The organization and delivery of Parents’ Nights made it clear that parent participation was strongly limited by a structure of power often faced by marginalized parents within the school space. The study suggested that it is important to move beyond cultural differences to understand actual ESL parent–teacher interactions and that us � ing bilingual assistants or liaisons may help parents participate fully in Parents’ Nights or similar school events. Implications for the future development of ESL parent–teacher communication are considered.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".