Acquisition du français en contexte linguistique minoritaire : la perspective des parents et des enseignants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’acquisition et le maintien de la langue française peuvent s’avérer des processus difficiles pour plusieurs, et ce, surtout en contexte minoritaire. Cette étude porte sur l’acquisition du français chez les enfants issus d’un contexte linguistique minoritaire selon la perspective des parents et des enseignants. Des parents (n = 108) et des enseignants (n = 37) d’un conseil scolaire du Nord-Est de l’Ontario ont rempli un questionnaire qui portait sur leurs perceptions par rapport à l’acquisition de la langue française et sur les stratégies qu’ils utilisent pour encourager et appuyer l’acquisition du français de la part des enfants. Une analyse qualitative de leurs réponses a été effectuée. Les parents et les enseignants ressentent des défis importants quant à l’acquisition de la langue française chez les enfants. Plusieurs stratégies visant à contrer l’effet de l’assimilation et à encourager l’usage du français dans les écoles de langue française ont été proposées.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".