MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2984144152 · doi:10.1080/09500782.2019.1682598

The pluralist language ideology of Korean immigrant mothers and the English-only principle in early childhood education programs

2019· article· en· W2984144152 on OpenAlexaffabout
Soon Young Jang

Bibliographic record

VenueLanguage and Education · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMultilingual Education and Policy
Canadian institutionsThompson Rivers University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationIdeologyLinguisticsSociologyDual languagePedagogyEarly childhood educationPsychologyMathematics educationPolitical sciencePoliticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada has been largely relying on immigration for population growth. Consequently, early childhood education (ECE) programs in Canadian cities are becoming increasingly linguistically and culturally diverse. Yet, few studies have explored the experiences of immigrant families in ECE programs. This study explores the perspectives and experiences of Korean immigrant mothers in ECE programs vis-à-vis bilingualism. Through a focus group meeting and eight individual interviews, this study investigates how these mothers’ language ideologies and attitudes are articulated in their discourses by asking these questions: 1) How did language play a role in the participating parents’ ECE program selection?; 2) Which language do participating parents prefer for their children to acquire and what are the associated factors?; and 3) What did participating parents experience regarding educators’ language views and practices? This study found that the Korean mothers hold pluralist language ideologies, expressing their desire for their children’s success in and integration into the mainstream society, and for their ethnic identity and family relationship preservation. Simultaneously, the participating mothers reported the English-only principle of ECE programs, which suggests the latter’s assimilationist view. The author discusses the common misconception related to this view, the maximum exposure hypothesis, and highlights implications for immigrant parents and educators.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0100.008
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations26
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLanguage and EducationSame topicMultilingual Education and PolicyFrench-language works237,207