MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2810564308

Development of English and French Literacy among Language Minority Children in French Immersion

2011· dissertation· en· W2810564308 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Karen Au-Yeung

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada) · 2011
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSecond Language Learning and Teaching
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFrench immersionLiteracyImmersion (mathematics)PsychologyLinguisticsSociologyPedagogyMathematicsPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined English and French literacy skills among language minority children in French immersion. Forty children with a first language other than English (non-English L1) and forty-one native English-speaking (EL1) children were examined on phonological awareness, rapid automatized naming, word reading, and English vocabulary at the beginning and end of Grade 1. They were also examined on phonological awareness, word reading, and French vocabulary at the end of the year. Non-English L1children experienced greater growth in English expressive vocabulary, and similar growth in English receptive vocabulary, to that of EL1 children. There was a cross-language transfer of phonological awareness and word reading from English to French, and cross-language relationship between English receptive vocabulary and French receptive vocabulary for both groups. Non-English L1 children do not lag behind in early English skills, even when their English exposure is limited in a French immersion setting.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.938
Threshold uncertainty score0.124

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.003
GPT teacher head0.149
Teacher spread0.146 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada)Same topicSecond Language Learning and TeachingFrench-language works237,207