To Gain or To Lose: Students’ English and Chinese Literacy Achievement in a Mandarin Language Bilingual Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The present study examined the effectiveness of a Chinese-English bilingual program in enhancing children’s English and Chinese language and literacy skills. Participants included an experimental group of 26 students from Junior Kindergarten (age approximately 4-5 years) to Grade 2 (age approximately 7-8 years) enrolled in a Mandarin language bilingual program in Ontario, Canada, and a comparison group of 43 Chinese-speaking students attending English-only public schools in the same region. Measures of phonological awareness, syntactic awareness, receptive vocabulary, and word reading were administered in English and Chinese. Children in the experimental group showed Chinese word reading and phonological awareness skills that were superior to those of the comparison group. The two groups were comparable in English word reading and receptive vocabulary skills. Significant correlations between measures of phonological awareness, syntactic awareness, receptive vocabulary, and word reading were found within and across languages in the experimental group. We discuss results within the context of the extant theories of bilingual development and cross-language transfer. Résumé La présente étude a examiné l’efficacité d’un programme bilingue chinois-anglais à améliorer les habiletés linguistiques en anglais et en chinois des enfants participant à ce programme. Dans le groupe expérimental, 26 élèves de la maternelle (4 et 5 ans) à la deuxième année (7 et 8 ans), scolarisés dans un programme bilingue mandarin en Ontario, au Canada, ont participé à l’étude. Le groupe comparatif incluait 43 élèves de langue chinoise scolarisés dans les écoles publiques anglaises de la même région. Des tâches de conscience phonologique, de conscience syntaxique, de vocabulaire réceptif et de lecture de mots ont été administrées en anglais et en chinois. Les élèves du groupe expérimental ont obtenu des résultats supérieurs que ceux du groupe comparatif sur les tâches de lecture de mots en chinois et de conscience phonologique. Les deux groupes étaient comparables dans les tâches de lecture de mots en anglais et de vocabulaire réceptif. La conscience phonologique, la conscience syntaxique, le vocabulaire réceptif et la lecture de mots étaient significativement corrélés à l’intérieur des langues et entre les langues des élèves du groupe expérimental. Nous discutons des résultats dans le contexte des théories existantes sur le développement bilingue et les transferts interlinguaux.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".