The role of home biliteracy environment in Chinese-Canadian children’s early bilingual receptive vocabulary development
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 This study examined the unique contributions of home biliteracy environment in English and Chinese to Chinese-Canadian children’s ( n = 148) bilingual receptive vocabulary development. The children (42 kindergarteners and 106 first graders) were tested on oral receptive vocabulary in Chinese and English. Their parents ( n = 148) filled out a questionnaire on home literacy environment (HLE) which included four dimensions in each language: parent-child shared reading, parent direct teaching, print resources, and digital devices usage in Chinese and English. Correlational and hierarchical linear modeling analyses indicated that HLE factors were less associated with English receptive vocabulary in grade-1 than in kindergarten but remained a strong contributor to Chinese vocabulary across both grades. English HLE was significantly associated with children’s English vocabulary in kindergarten but not in grade 1. However, Chinese HLE had a significant effect on Chinese vocabulary in both kindergarten and grade 1. The four dimensions of HLE in each language also had differential relationships with bilingual vocabulary development in kindergarten and grade 1 with parents’ direct teaching and the number of books in English and Chinese being consistent positive factors in facilitating bilingual vocabulary development in both grades. These findings highlight the importance of home biliteracy environment, particularly direct parental involvement, in early bilingual vocabulary 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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