Narrative abilities in subgroups of English language learners and monolingual peers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aims and objectives: The objective of this study was to examine the narrative ability of two subgroups of English Language Learners (ELLs) relative to a group of English monolingual (EL1) peers. Specifically, we investigated whether the three groups of children differed on measures of narrative macrostructure and microstructure. Methodology: Two groups of ELLs were identified on the basis of parent report of the language most often heard and spoken at home (ELL English language users, ELL minority language users). A group of monolingual English children served as a comparison group ( n = 25 per language group). The children averaged 56 months of age. All children completed a narrative retell task. Data and analysis: The retell task was scored in relation to macrostructure (narrative information) and microstructure (number of utterances, mean length of utterance, number of different words, grammaticality). ANCOVAs, partialling out age and memory, revealed distinct performance profiles for the two ELL groups. Findings: There were no group differences on the number of utterances or story grammar. However, the performance of the ELL minority language group was significantly different from that of the EL1 and the ELL English language group on all microstructure measures (number of different words, sentence length, and grammaticality). Overall, the performance of the ELL English language users was indistinguishable from the EL1 group. Originality: The study highlights the heterogeneity in an ELL kindergarten sample with respect to English narrative ability, based on the extent to which English was heard and spoken at home. Implications: The findings highlight the need to gather detailed linguistic information about the home language environments of ELL children when involving them in language- or literacy-related tasks. An important implication of this information is the potential to lead to more nuanced expectations or teaching methods for subgroups of ELL 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".