[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-596094-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":85,"doc-detail-596094-en":134},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":78,"head_meta":80,"extra_data":82,"updated_unix":84},105,"en","evaluating-the-oral-language-skills-of-english-stream-and-french-immersion-students-are-the-clbnclc-applicable","Evaluating the Oral Language Skills of English-Stream and French Immersion Students: Are the CLB/NCLC Applicable?","","This study examined the oral language skills of grade-two anglophone children enrolled in French Immersion and English-stream programs. The research pursued two goals: comparing group performance on receptive vocabulary, narrative comprehension, and narrative production in English, and evaluating whether the Canadian Language Benchmarks/Niveaux de compétences linguistiques canadiens (CLB/NCLC) apply to assessment of conversational competency. Children were tested in English, and immersion students were tested in French using equivalent measures. Results showed no English group differences in receptive vocabulary, narrative comprehension, or narrative structure, while English-stream students outperformed on narrative language. CLB/NCLC listening and speaking criteria generated level scores in English for both groups and in French for immersion students, and appropriate benchmark ranges were discussed.",{"@graph":14,"@context":77},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/evaluating-the-oral-language-skills-of-english-stream-and-french-immersion-students-are-the-clbnclc-applicable/596094/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/evaluating-the-oral-language-skills-of-english-stream-and-french-immersion-students-are-the-clbnclc-applicable/596094.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Anna Hans","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-05","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",9,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69,73],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What is the main purpose of this study?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"To compare oral language skills between French Immersion and English-stream students and to examine whether CLB/NCLC criteria can be applied to assess conversational competency.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"Which language measures were used to compare the two groups in English?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"Receptive vocabulary, narrative comprehension, and narrative production, including narrative structure and narrative language.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"How did the groups perform in English on the narrative measures?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"No differences were found for receptive vocabulary, narrative comprehension, or narrative structure, but the English-stream students outperformed French Immersion peers in narrative language.",{"name":74,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":75},"Were CLB/NCLC listening and speaking criteria applied, and what were the outcomes?",{"text":76,"@type":64},"Yes. Level scores were produced from conversational samples in English for both groups and in French for French Immersion students, and the suitable benchmark range for this population was discussed.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":79,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":81,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":83,"site_id":7},596094,1792171634,{"code":4,"msg":86,"data":87},"success",[88,92,96,100,105,110,115,119,123,126,130],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":97,"show_sort_weight":98,"slug":99},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":101,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":102,"show_sort_weight":103,"slug":104},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":106,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":107,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":112,"show_sort_weight":113,"slug":114},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":116,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},8,30,"research-report",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":121,"slug":122},"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":121,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":121,"slug":125},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":127,"slug":129},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":131,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":132,"show_sort_weight":101,"slug":133},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":86,"data":135},{"doc_id":83,"user_id":136,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":137,"doc_module":4,"category_id":116,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":138,"file_id":139,"file_url":140,"file_type":141,"file_size":142,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":143,"language":144,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":145,"faqs":146,"seo_title":147,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":148,"read_time":149,"preview_page_count":4},5909892332657,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_994ba38a5ba835b3df7d355c54d3ed8d","CJAL * RCLA Burchell, Hipfner-Boucher, Selvachandran, Cleave & Chen 118  \nEvaluating the Oral Language Skills of English-Stream and French Immersion Students: Are the CLB/NCLC Applicable?  \nDiana Burchell  \nUniversity of Toronto  \nKathleen Hipfner-Boucher  \nUniversity of Toronto  \nJanani Selvachandran  \nUniversity of Toronto  \nPatricia Cleave  \nDalhousie University  \nXi Chen  \nUniversity of Toronto  \nAbstract  \nThis study examined the oral language skills of grade-two anglophone children enrolled in French Immersion and English-stream programs. The study had two objectives: (a) to compare performance between the groups on measures of receptive vocabulary, narrative comprehension, and narrative production (i.e., structure and language) in English, and (b) to explore the applicability of the Canadian Language Benchmarks/Niveaux de compétences linguistiques canadiens (CLB/NCLC) to assessment of their conversational competency. All children (English-stream n = 27, French Immersion n = 33, aged 7-8 years) were tested in English. In addition, the French Immersion students were tested using equivalent measures in French. The results comparing performance in English revealed no differences between the groups on receptive vocabulary, narrative comprehension and narrative structure. However, the English-stream children outperformed their French Immersion peers in narrative language. Furthermore, CLB/NCLC listening and speaking criteria were applied to conversational samples yielding level scores in English (both groups) and French (French Immersion only) . The range of benchmarks that are appropriate for this population is discussed in detail.  \nRésumé  \nCette étude compare les habiletés langagières orales en anglais et en français d’élèves anglophones de deuxième année, scolarisés en anglais ou en immersion française. L’étude avait deux objectifs : (1) comparer les performances des deux groupes d’enfants sur un test de vocabulaire réceptif, de compréhension narrative et de production narrative (c.- à -d., structure et langage narratifs) en anglais (2) tester l’applicabilité des Niveaux decompétences linguistiques canadiens (CLB/NCLC) à l’évaluation de la fluidité  \nCanadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, Special Issue: 23, 2 (2020): 118-140  \nCJAL * RCLA Burchell, Hipfner-Boucher, Selvachandran, Cleave & Chen 119  \nconversationnelle chez les enfants en anglais et en français. Vingt-sept enfants scolarisés en anglais et 33 enfants scolarisés en immersion française, tous âgés de 7 à 8 ans, ont été évaluésen anglais. Les enfants en immersion française ont aussi été évalués en français au moyen detests de vocabulaire réceptif et de compétences narratives équivalents à ceux utilisés en anglais. Les résultats comparatifs en anglais ne révélaient aucune différence entre les deux groupes quant au vocabulaire réceptif et à la compréhension et la structure narratives en anglais. Cependant, la performance des élèves scolarisés en anglais était supérieure à celledes élèves en immersion française quant au langage narratif. De plus, les critères des CLB/NCLC portant sur la compréhension et l’expression orales ont été transposés aux échantillons de langage conversationnel recueillis, donnant des scores de niveau en anglais et en français. Enfin, la gamme de niveaux pouvant être transposés à cette population est discutée en détail.  \nEvaluating the Oral Language Skills of English-Stream and French Immersion Students: Are the CLB/NCLC Applicable?  \nEnglish-French bilingualism is a highly valued societal goal in Canada. (Paradis et al., 2011). For many Canadian children growing up in English-speaking families, competency in French as an additional language is achieved in school through French Immersion. French Immersion is predicated on the concept of additive bilingualism, the development of proficiency in a second language (L2) while maintaining proficiency in the first language (L1) (Genesee, 2004). Through early French Immersion programs, nonfranco","cbCainmXJRiPqEKd","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCainmXJRiPqEKd","pdf",302998,23,"English","# Abstract\n## Study objectives and participants\n## Measures: receptive vocabulary, narrative comprehension, narrative production\n## CLB/NCLC applicability to conversational samples\n## Findings and benchmark range discussion","[{\"question\":\"What is the main purpose of this study?\",\"answer\":\"To compare oral language skills between French Immersion and English-stream students and to examine whether CLB/NCLC criteria can be applied to assess conversational competency.\"},{\"question\":\"Which language measures were used to compare the two groups in English?\",\"answer\":\"Receptive vocabulary, narrative comprehension, and narrative production, including narrative structure and narrative language.\"},{\"question\":\"How did the groups perform in English on the narrative measures?\",\"answer\":\"No differences were found for receptive vocabulary, narrative comprehension, or narrative structure, but the English-stream students outperformed French Immersion peers in narrative language.\"},{\"question\":\"Were CLB/NCLC listening and speaking criteria applied, and what were the outcomes?\",\"answer\":\"Yes. Level scores were produced from conversational samples in English for both groups and in French for French Immersion students, and the suitable benchmark range for this population was discussed.\"}]","Evaluating the Oral Language Skills of English-Stream and French Immersion Students: Are the CLB/NCLC Applicable? | PDF",1792082428,58]