French Immersion for English Language Learners?: Kindergarten Teachers’ Perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Given the increasingly diverse, multilingual student body in Canada, the call for increased inclusion in education, and in light of research highlighting the potential for inclusion in French immersion (FI) to be limited by gatekeepers, this study examines the beliefs of kindergarten teachers regarding the inclusion of English language learners in French immersion where entry begins in Grade 1. The theory of planned behavior as discussed by Ajzen (2005) served as a theoretical lens through which the data were examined. In particular, through their responses to a mixed format questionnaire, including a 12 item Likert scale of agreement and open-ended questions, kindergarten teachers revealed that a) French immersion is not for everyone, and b) may be disadvantageous to English language learners in particular. The teachers grounded their beliefs in the importance and influence of English on students’ future endeavours. Beliefs that FI is not for all students were supported by the board’s provision of information to parents as revealed by a document analysis. Such findings highlight the need for information sharing on multilingual language acquisition to extend beyond administrators to include parents and additional educators who have the potential to influence parents’ choices for their children.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 teacher head, 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".