Reading to bilingual preschoolers: An experimental study of two book formats
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
Abstract Reading stories to children provides opportunities for word learning. Bilingual children, however, encounter new words in each of their languages during shared storybook reading, and the way in which these words are presented can vary. We compared learning from two types of bilingual book materials: single‐language books and bilingual books. Five‐year‐old English‐French bilinguals ( n = 67) were randomly assigned to hear an original story from a balanced bilingual experimenter in one of the two book formats. Children's learning of English and French labels for five novel objects embedded in the story was assessed via a pointing task. Children were successful at learning words in both languages, and performance was not affected by book format nor children's language proficiency. These results suggest that children are flexible word learners and that shared book reading – regardless of book format – is an effective way to teach bilingual children new words in two languages. Highlights In a shared storybook reading task, bilingual 5‐year‐olds encountered new words in two languages via single‐language or bilingual books. Word learning from the two book formats was compared. Both formats supported word learning, regardless of children's language proficiency. Bilingual children are flexible word learners, and shared book reading – regardless of book format – supports bilingual literacy development.
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) | 0.001 | 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 it