Creating Space for Students' Mother Tongues in College Classrooms: A Collaborative Investigation of Process and Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study is a qualitative action research that I have undertaken with four teachers in the college where I work, for the purpose of improving curriculum delivery and student services to our majority multilingual student body. Based on my research in a public school board with Grades 4 to 12 students where I learned that mother tongues (L1s) are valued by students as scaffolds to their learning of English (L2) I proceeded to explore L1/L2 curriculum delivery with adult community college students whose prior learning is encoded in their mother tongues. I explored the possibility of legitimizing the use of students’ mother tongues in college classrooms as scaffolds to their acquisition of their L2. There were three phases to this study. Through these three phases of the study I sought to understand the impact of this multilingual pedagogical approach on the students’ learning experience, academic engagement and identity formation. In phase 1, I worked with 90 English as a Second Language (ESL) students whom I surveyed to determine their levels of understanding of our English-only curriculum delivery and student services. In phase 2, I worked with three English for Academic Purposes (EAP) students and interviewed them to explore their reaction to their teacher’s allowing them to use their mother tongues in class as part of pedagogy. In phase 3, I worked with 19 EAP students and interviewed them in focus groups to explore more deeply their learning experience, academic engagement and identity formation in two college classrooms where their mother tongues were part of everyday pedagogy. On the basis of the findings of this study I argue that the creation of space for students’ mother tongues in college classrooms is an ethical imperative since their mother tongues are integral components of their identities and all of their prior learning and life experiences are encoded in their mother tongues. Overall the findings highlighted bilingual students’ perceptions that their L1s constituted an important scaffold for their learning of English. Students’ comments also expressed their sense of the centrality of L1s to aspects of their identity.
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 | 0.021 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.022 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| 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".