Biliteracy for bilingual children with reading impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Families, educators, and professionals can struggle to decide whether bilingual children with reading impairment should read in an additional language. To that end, we examined the effect of biliteracy (reading in both the home and school language) on bilingual children with reading impairment. In this single subject design (SSD), six bilingual participants with reading impairment who attended French-only school participated in a parent-supported, home-based reading intervention (reading aloud with praise and error correction) in English. Connected-text reading in English; word- and nonword-reading accuracy, rate and fluency in both English and French were compared from a no-intervention phase (reading only in French) to an intervention phase (reading in French and English). Visual data inspection, as per SSD protocol, revealed no deceleration trends in word-reading, nonword-reading and connected-text reading accuracy scores in English. Only one older participant showed mild deceleration in French word-reading accuracy, with accompanying higher individual mean scores, during the intervention phase. Group mean word-reading and connected-text reading fluency levels were significantly higher during the intervention phase as compared to the no-intervention phase. Nonword reading, a hallmark of reading impairment, and word-reading rate were more variable across phases. Findings suggest biliteracy does not adversely impact word reading in either 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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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 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".