Bridging Two Solitudes - Integrating Literacy Research across linguistic, cultural and disciplinary boundaries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although there has been increasing interest and openness over the past two decades towards conducting interdisciplinary and collaborative language and literacy research, Anglophone and francophone scholarship in Canada have remained largely isolated within their respective linguistic communities.In 2014, both Anglophone and Francophone scholars came together for a pre-conference hosted at the annual meeting of Language and Literacy Researchers of Canada -L'Association canadienne de chercheurs en langue et litteratie (LLRC-ACCLL) on the theme of "Bridging (Two) Solitudes: Integrating Literacy Research across linguistic, cultural and disciplinary boundaries" in alignment with the broader theme of "Borders without Boundaries" at the Congress of the Humanities and Social Sciences.As applied linguistics and education researchers, we read this theme in relation to the historic divide between Canada's official languages, what Cummins ( 2008) has called a "two solitudes approach to bilingualism".Through this lens, two solitudes refers to the ways in which French and English have traditionally been conceptualized in curriculum for Canadian classrooms, compartmentalized as linguistic silos without engaging either language as a resource in the instruction of the other, and without acknowledging the legitimacy of and the potential for bi/multilingual language practice (ie.code-mixing, translanguaging) to enhance meaning making and communication in the educational context.Pedagogically, this approach disregards the extent to which students' linguistic resources are dynamically intertwined in cognitive processes and social activity; moreover, it overlooks the full range of students' linguistic repertoires, which may include not only official languages of English and/or French, but also minoritized languages such as Indigenous languages and immigrant languages.Within our field, the two solitudes metaphor has been used both as a critique and an invitation to consider the assumptions and theoretical bases of bilingualism guiding the work of educators, teacher educators and university-based researchers.For these reasons, we saw the conference theme as well-suited to bring together Francophone and Anglophone language and literacy research.We purposefully organized the pre-conference to foster bilingual dialogue and to build bridges across theories, methodologies, and scholars themselves as a way of supporting future language and literacy research in Canada.To meet this goal required reflection upon our positionality at the time as two Anglophone doctoral candidate cochairs of the pre-conference, a desire for representation of linguistic diversity within our national association, and participation of both Anglophone and Francophone scholars in our pre-conference activities.Prior to this pre-conference, bilingual practices had not explicitly been a part of LLRC-ACCLL's mandate, nor had print or digital communications been disseminated in French.Importantly, 2014
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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".