Immigrant Parents' Perspectives on Heritage Language Maintenance and Multilingual Digital Books
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT \nImmigrant Parents’ Perspectives on Heritage Language Maintenance and Multilingual Books \nOnyemechi Fikani \nMany immigrant parents in Canada seek to foster their children’s language and literacy development in a heritage language as well as the official languages of English and French. The purpose of this study is to describe immigrant parents’ (a) beliefs and practices related to passing on a heritage language to their children and (b) views on using websites providing digital stories in multiple languages as a resource to support the heritage language. \nThrough two semi-structured interviews, eight parents reflected on their heritage language and literacy practices, shared their beliefs about heritage language maintenance, and described their experience of sharing digital stories on the Storybooks Canada and Global Storybooks websites with their children. Analysis of the interview transcripts revealed that participants engaged in parent-child conversations, storybook reading, and storytelling to support their children’s language development in both the heritage language and one or both of Canada’s official languages. The parents also believed that multilingualism was pertinent to the future of their children and valued the role of extended family and community in passing on their home language, culture, and identity. To support their efforts to transfer heritage languages, parents reported they needed more resources, language schools, and access to books in their home languages. Additionally, parents believed that the storybook websites were helpful in the maintenance of heritage languages and most (6 of the 8 participants) showed interest in incorporating the websites into their language and literacy practices. The findings can inform schools, families, and immigration policymakers.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".