Linguistic and Cultural Collaboration in Schools: Reconciling Majority and Minoritized Language Users
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article extends the work of culturally sustaining pedagogy by moving towards the conceptualization of linguistic and cultural collaboration (LCC) in classrooms through reconciliation of majoritarian and minoritized language users. Whereas attention in mainstream educational research has been given to students’ cultures, this article underscores that explicit attention to diverse languages and language varieties is essential to reconfiguration of power relations in schools and reconciliation among culturally and linguistically minoritized and dominant groups. Drawing on scholarship regarding plurilingual and multilingual practice, the authors conceptualize LCC as both a process and a product that expands all students’ critical multilingual language awareness. They draw on an ongoing research‐practice partnership (RPP) with a U.S. school district experiencing growing cultural and linguistic diversity. The article focuses on a single school to illustrate how LCC has been taken up as a whole‐school approach to leveraging students’ and families’ cultural and linguistic resources as vital to learning and living together in a multicultural and multilingual world. After outlining development of the RPP following a social design–based methodology, the authors discuss how in practice reconciliation is forged as teachers, students, and their families engage in collaborative multilingual bookmaking. They focus on three aspects of reconciliation (collaboration, restoration, living together) that support students in becoming more language‐aware and in moving towards multilingual activism.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it