English Language Learners in Canadian Schools: Emerging Directions for School-Based Policies
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article attempts to provide ESL teachers, school administrators, and policymakers with a concise overview of what matters in promoting academic success among learners of English in Canadian schools. We review research focused on bilingual and biliteracy development, the nature of academic language, and the roles of societal power relations and identity negotiation in determining the academic achievement of English language learners (ELL). On the basis of this research, we propose the Literacy Engagement framework that identifies literacy engagement as a major determinant of literacy achievement for ELL and non-ELL students. In order to enable ELL students to engage with literacy, the framework highlights the importance of teachers scaffolding meaning, connecting with students’ lives, affirming student identities, and extending their awareness and knowledge of language across the curriculum. The application of the framework is illustrated with reference to the literacy and academic learning experiences of two ELL students in the Toronto area.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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) | 0.005 | 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 it