Linguistic and reading comprehension in simultaneous dual language instruction: Evidence against unitary constructs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aims and Objectives/Purpose/Research Questions: This paper describes a study investigating the relationships between reading and listening comprehension in a simultaneous dual language instruction context. We explored whether listening and reading comprehension are unitary constructs across the first language (L1) and the second language (L2). Design/Methodology/Approach: Listening comprehension and reading comprehension measures were administered twice over a school year in English and French. Data and Analysis: Stepwise regression analyses were undertaken with 206 typical children in grade 4 classrooms in French Immersion programs. Findings/Conclusions: Analyses showed listening comprehension in the L1 and listening comprehension in the L2 both independently predicted reading comprehension concurrently. Reading comprehension in the L1 and reading comprehension in the L2 both predicted reading comprehension in the L1 and L2 longitudinally and symmetrically within, as well as across, home language groups. Originality and Significance/Implications: Findings suggest that listening comprehension and reading comprehension are not unitary constructs and possibly suggest synergistic recruitment of distinct L1 and L2 listening comprehension and reading comprehension resources in dual language comprehension, as suggested by the Development Interdependence Hypothesis. Both dual language policy and school-based practices might be enhanced through collaborative planning and activities that support this natural interdependence of component reading processes across languages, while also being aware that language comprehension abilities may not be at comparable levels across L1s and L2s by grade 4 in immersion contexts.
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 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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".