Play, early literacy, and home culture : a case study in two Chinese immigrant families
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Through a qualitative case study design, the relationships among play, early literacy, and home culture were investigated in the lives of two young children from recent Chinese immigrant families in Canada. The purpose of this study was to describe how play and literacy learning converge in the children's home life and how the children's parents' views of play and literacy learning influence their children's perception of and behaviours in their play and literacy activities. To understand the children's play lives, I draw on the theories of emergent literacy, social constructivism, and critical theory. Descriptive field notes, transcripts of the children's conversations, and in-depth interviews with parents were collected over a period of six months. This study provides evidence that play is an integrated way to early literacy learning at home from three perspectives: the literate potentials of play, play as a context for literacy learning in a specific culture, and play as a supportive medium for self construction in relation to literacy. The individual differences between the two children's play and literacy activities are explored from their family cultures and experiences. This study also reinforces the critical importance of parents' views of play and literacy learning in their interactions with their children and the effects on their children's play and literacy activities. It is hoped that the study will give parents, early childhood educators, and family literacy programme coordinators insights into how to promote young children's literacy learning and self construction through play in culturally diverse contexts. Further research directions are also suggested.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 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".