MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6989111148

Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal mothers’ views on language acquisition

2009· dissertation· en· W6989111148 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2009
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedical Research and Islamic Perspectives
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFacilitationIdentification (biology)Culturally appropriateFirst languageLanguage acquisitionLanguage developmentEthnic group
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Language development is central to how children learn and participate within their environment and specific cultural milieu. There is little information available on the process of language acquisition for Aboriginal children. The purpose of this study was to investigate caregiver-child interactions regarding language development from the perspectives of Aboriginal mothers. Thirty Aboriginal mothers from the remote northern community of Lac Brochet, Manitoba, and 30 non-Aboriginal mothers from an urban area of Winnipeg were administered a 36-item survey. Discriminant statistical analysis was carried out on the data. Results indicated there were few items within the survey that assisted in the identification of cultural groups. The differences in beliefs that were noted included Aboriginal mothers’ placing a higher value on grandparents’ roles in child rearing, the influence of spirituality, positive views on “baby talk”, and the use of instructions when teaching their children. Differences were also noted in the frequency with which the two groups used language facilitation techniques, with the Aboriginal mothers reporting more frequent use overall. . The results of the surveys suggested that one group of Aboriginal mothers in a northern Manitoba Dene community may have many of the same perspectives on language facilitation as urban non-Aboriginal mothers. Thus educators and speech-language pathologists may find they can recommend some of the same Western-based practices for language facilitation with some Aboriginal caregivers. However, each community and individual family is different, therefore and thus , it remains crucial for practitioners to determine the appropriateness of the Western-based assumptions for each community and individual family.. The findings also indicated that Aboriginal mothers valued native language preservation. Clinicians providing services within Aboriginal communities must be aware of each family’s use of native languages and the presence of dual language acquisition and exposure. Dual language acquisition beganin the caregivers’ homes and should be supported throughout the school years, so that a collaborative network of language facilitation can occur.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.326
Threshold uncertainty score0.889

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.254 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it