Executive Function and Language Input: Neurological Insights from French Immersion Learners
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines how the consistency of French language input by teachers in immersion classrooms impacts both language acquisition and executive function in elementary students, including those with neurodivergent profiles. A cross-sectional observational study was conducted with 128 students aged 7–9 across five immersion schools in Winnipeg. Participants were grouped based on observed teacher language input consistency. Data included standardized cognitive and language assessments, parent surveys, and teacher evaluations using the BRIEF-2. Students receiving ≥90% French input outperformed peers in vocabulary, working memory, and inhibitory control. Neurodivergent students also demonstrated gains in high-consistency environments, though with greater variance. Findings support the cognitive benefits of immersion fidelity. However, rigid language policies may risk excluding vulnerable learners. The results call for adaptive strategies that combine linguistic consistency with inclusive pedagogy. Consistent French instruction enhances language and cognitive outcomes for diverse learners. Immersion policies must balance fidelity with flexibility to remain equitable and neurologically supportive.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".