Canadian School-aged Heritage Language Learners' Patterns of Language Use, Proficiency and Beliefs about Learning their Two Languages
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present dissertation examined the language use, proficiency and beliefs of child heritage language learners (HLLs) from Spanish and Chinese heritage language (HL) backgrounds exposed to English as a second language (L2) upon school entry (N=63). Data were collected via HL and L2 proficiency measures and a semi-structured interview and pictorial measure, during the primary years, a period noted for HL loss (Wong Fillmore, 1991). Study 1 focused on patterns of language input and use in children’s lives. Children mostly used L2 in their activities and in their interactions with siblings, cousins and peers. With parents, grandparents and older relatives, children mostly used HL. Study 2 investigated children’s proficiency and changes in proficiency across HL and L2 language and literacy domains. Children appraised their HL oral language skills at low to moderate levels, and viewed their HL literacy skills as very low. Contrarily, their appraisals of L2 skills were uniformly high across all domains. Children demonstrated limited HL proficiency, whereas they demonstrated moderate L2 skills in all domains. Concordance between perceived and demonstrated proficiency was low, with only one in three children accurate in their self-evaluations. While children indicated loss, stability and growth in their HL skills equally, most children indicated growth in L2 skills since beginning school. Children demonstrated growth in HL oral language and reading and in all L2 domains. Qualitative analysis indicated that children overwhelmingly referenced markers of language and literacy skill in explanations of their appraisals. Other attributions for proficiency and changes in proficiency included assistance from others, different learning approaches, the influence of language environments, and feedback received from others. Study 3 investigated children’s affects and beliefs in relation to HL and L2 situations. Positive affect was associated with listening and speaking HL in the home context, and with L2 across all domains and contexts. Skill in the domain or language was a common rationale for children’s affective responses to language and literacy situations. Children also associated their affect with interest in the target domain/language, availability of assistance, membership in language groups and the influence of language environments. Considerations for further research with this population and recommendations for relevant parties are discussed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".