Understanding family factors for language transmission of minoritized languages in bilingual kindergarten children growing up in multilingual neighbourhoods
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
Becoming bilingual is a necessity for many children because the language spoken at home is not the language used in school. Situated in multlingual neighborhoods, this study reports on a diverse group of 173 kindergarten children who spoke a minoritized language at home. By pairing the frameworks of Community Cultural Wealth with family language policy, the study aimed to describe families’ daily language use patterns at home and in the community, and family valuation of the home language. While proficiency in the home language varied across the children, most parents valued the transmission of their home language. Practices that supported the transmission of the home language included the use of home language with their children, opportunities to use the home language in the community context, and the importance of the home language for the child. In addition, we observed that many children in the study had parents who spoke the same home language as a first language(s), and had siblings who used this language at home. Strategies adapted to the needs of different profiles within multilingual families could be employed to support the transmission and maintenance of the minoritized language.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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