Development and Cross-language Transfer of Oral Reading Fluency using Longitudinal and Concurrent Predictors among Canadian French Immersion Primary-level Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis investigates development and transfer of oral reading fluency among early French immersion students. Using a longitudinal design, students were assessed on phonological awareness, rapid naming, word-level fluency and text-level fluency in English and in French in Grade 2 and Grade 3. In three related studies, this thesis examines transfer both within levels of fluency individually (word-level and text-level) and between levels of fluency (from word-level to text-level). The results indicated that word-level fluency significantly improved over the one-year period in both English and in French. Language status comparing English-as-first-language students (EL1) and English-language-learners (ELLs) did not influence fluency performance in either language. Further, results showed bidirectional transfer of fluency at the word-level and the text-level independently, and unidirectional transfer from word to text fluency from French to English only. These findings provide evidence supporting cross-language transfer of oral reading fluency both within and between levels of the construct.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".