Friend or Foe? A Mixed-Methods Study on the Impact of Digital Device Use on Chinese–Canadian Children’s Heritage Language Learning

2.1 Children’s Use of Digital Devices in the North American Context

The use of digital devices at home has been a topic of research interest for several decades. Recent studies consider a broad range of digital devices such as televisions, computers, tablets, and telephones. Studies with large participant samples in the U.S. (Kabali et al. 2015; Lauricella et al. 2015) have found early and universal exposure to multiple digital devices including televisions, tablets, smartphones, and tablets. They reported that children’s exposure to digital devices was as early as before age one (Kabali et al. 2015). Among a nationally representative sample of 2,300 families in the U.S., children under age eight spent an average of 1.75 h per day for television viewing, 25 min with computers, 29 min with tablets, and 15 min with smartphones (Lauricella et al. 2015). The amount of children’s screen time already increased from that observed in the 2010s, which was around 1–2 h per day (Linebarger and Vaala 2010).

Auxier and colleagues (2020) confirmed the widespread of multiple digital devices in the U.S. Television was the most common digital device used by children, with 93 % of 3–4-year-olds and 91 % of 5–8-year-olds reporting regular engagement. Tablets were also popular, with usage increasing from 35 % in 0–2-year-olds to 81 % in 5–8-year-olds. Smartphones were used by 59 % of 3–4-year-olds and 60 % of 9–11-year-olds. Desktop or laptop computers saw a lower yet still significant usage, with 12 % in 0–2-year-olds and 73 % in 9–11-year-olds. The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a dramatic increase in children’s digital device use. According to a recent study (Sonnenschein et al. 2023) with 348 students in the U.S., for 3–5-year-olds, both the frequency and duration of digital use have nearly doubled since the onset of the pandemic. Early elementary children have increased their daily digital use from 2–2.5 h per day to 3–4 h or more. The use of certain devices such as tablets and smartphones has almost tripled.

Lauricella and colleagues (2015) found that child age was a significant predictor of child use for all digital devices, and parents’ time spent on each type of digital device was strongly associated with children’s time of use on each digital device. Parent attitudes served as a key contributor to children’s screen time, as parents who viewed the impact of technology more positively had children who spent more time with digital devices. Interestingly, the interaction between parent attitudes and child age further influenced children’s digital device use. Parental attitudes were influential for children under age five but were not impactful when children reached 6–8 years old.

Domoff and colleagues (2019) conducted an observational study by recording family interactions related to digital use in the homes of 21 toddlers, 31 preschool-age children, and 23 school-age children in the U.S. Their findings revealed that parental control and participation in children’s digital device use was mostly restrictive, reactive, and tech-focused, such as setting limits or rules about the content and duration of digital device use; less was in active mediation including discussion with children about media content, which are more crucial for language development than using digital devices alone (Blankson et al. 2015). The authors highlighted the need for more research on naturalistic family practices to understand how digital device use impacts children’s language development.

2.2 Family Digital Device Use and Child Language Development

Research has identified certain key factors that influence the relationship between family digital use and children’s language development. Studies in the U.S. examined the impacts of background television and found that, in the presence of background television, the quantity (the number of words spoken per minute) and quality (the number of new words per minute) of parent-child interactions decreased (Pempek et al. 2014), which was proved to have significant negative impacts on children’s expressive vocabulary acquisition at 17 months (Masur et al. 2016). A study in Canada by Pagani et al. (2013) also reported that increased daily television viewing at 29 months negatively predicted receptive vocabulary development.

Parental involvement in digital device use has since emerged as a crucial factor in child language development. Hudon and colleagues (2013) conducted a study with English monolingual, French monolingual, and English-French bilingual toddlers from Ottawa, Canada, and examined children’s vocabulary size in their languages along with family television habits. The study found that the overall quantity of television exposure had no effect on vocabulary scores. However, children who were less often accompanied by an adult and who were exposed more to adult programs had poorer vocabulary scores. A meta-analysis by Madigan et al. (2020) further confirmed the positive effects of co-viewing and higher-quality educational content on children’s language skills. These findings suggested that the quality of digital exposure, meaning how children are supported in learning through digital resources, should be prioritized over quantity when assessing its impact on language development.

Another meta-analysis conducted by Jing and colleagues (2023) examined several factors moderating the relationship between young children’s digital device use and vocabulary development, including child age, type and platform of digital resources, interactivity, and vocabulary type. The findings revealed that the positive effect of digital use on vocabulary development increased with age, with a larger impact observed in children of 36 months and older; interactive content has a stronger positive effect than non-interactive content; exposure to educational video resources produced a greater positive effect than unspecified video resources. The authors suggested that, on the negative side, digital device use may disrupt time spent in real-life social activities, which are generally more beneficial for vocabulary growth. On the positive side, digital use can provide additional opportunities for children’s exposure to language-enriching content, especially when designed to promote language development.

In sum, multiple factors influence the relationship between digital device use and language development, and the impact of digital device use is not uniform but depends on specific family practices and the different features of digital content. It’s important to note that while most existing studies have focused on English language learning in the North American context, very few have examined the learning of minority languages, which often lack resources outside the home and may depend more on digital platforms for support. Therefore, research on non-dominant language learning may offer new insights into the effects of digital device use at home.

2.3 Digital Device Use and Heritage Language Learning

There is a growing interest in research on the interplay between digital device use and heritage language development in recent years. Sun and Yin (2020) revealed that the diversity of multimedia resources, rather than the sheer amount of exposure (or quantity), was a significant predictor of children’s Mandarin language proficiency. The findings suggest that exposure to a wide range of digital content in the heritage language may provide richer language input and help compensate for the limited conventional language input available in the home environment.

Smith and Li (2022) argued that children’s heritage language learning through digital resources extends beyond passive consumption. Examining the reading attitudes of 58 Chinese–American children aged 10–18, they found that increased use of Chinese for written posts on social media was associated with a stronger “ideal heritage language self” (p. 1071), which suggested that active engagement in digital use with heritage language may boost learning motivation. Moreover, the researchers further posited that digital environments may offer an additional source of language modeling and support for heritage language learners. This is particularly crucial given that heritage language education heavily relies on parents and volunteer teachers who often lack professional training in language teaching.

The COVID-19 pandemic had created a unique context for studying the relationship between heritage language learning and digital device use. Sheng and colleagues (2021) compared digital usage before and during the pandemic among Mandarin-English bilingual children in the U.S. and Canada. Their findings showed that during the pandemic, children used digital devices more frequently for Mandarin language activities, including web surfing, playing games, listening to stories, watching Mandarin programs, and attending Mandarin language classes. The children also performed better in Mandarin compared to the pre-pandemic period. Similarly, Sun et al. (2023) examined the impact of COVID-19 on English–Mandarin bilingual children’s conventional and digital language environments in Singapore. They found that the pandemic led to an increase in heritage language input at home, along with more frequent use of digital devices for language learning.

These findings highlight the potential of digital resources to support heritage language maintenance, particularly when conventional language exposure is limited. For Chinese heritage language learners, the global Chinese-speaking community is especially active in digital spaces, utilizing platforms like WeChat and language-learning apps (Zhao and Flewitt 2020), which offer additional opportunities for language learning. However, the limited number of studies leaves room for further research to explore the nuanced and complex dynamics of heritage language learning through digital device use. As families increasingly integrate digital devices and online resources into family language practices, there is a growing need for more in-depth, comprehensive studies to examine how digital device use impacts heritage language learning.

In particular, we focus on receptive vocabulary to measure children’s heritage language development in this study. Vocabulary is essential in heritage language studies (Li et al. 2022; Sun and Yin 2020) because it serves as a critical foundation of overall language development. A robust vocabulary knowledge may enhance children’s motivation to use the language actively and to learn to communicate effectively. Receptive vocabulary skills specifically refer to the words and phrases that learners can understand but may not actively use in conversation yet. The initial phase of receptive vocabulary acquisition often influences children’s learning motivation, as well as their sense of connection to the heritage language and cultural identity (Li et al. 2021). Some studies have shown early stagnation or decline in heritage language among Chinese-speaking children in North America (e.g., Jia et al. 2014; Li et al. 2021), especially as they progress through their academic journey in schools. It is essential to examine children’s acquisition of receptive vocabulary in early grades to support their learning and maintenance of more complex heritage language skills later on. Against this backdrop, this mixed-methods study aimed to address the following research questions:

1. What are the digital device use and receptive vocabulary achievement patterns among the Chinese–Canadian children from Grade 1 to Grade 3?

2. What are the relationships between children’s digital device use and their receptive vocabulary development over the three years?

3. How do family practices of digital device use evolve over the three years, and how do they affect the children’s Chinese language development?

3.1 Participants

Participants were recruited through a snowball sampling method. The study targeted children whose parents were Chinese immigrants, who spoke Chinese (either Mandarin or Cantonese) at home, and who were enrolled in kindergarten through third grade in Canadian schools. The sample included 128 first-grade students from the 2019–2020 academic year, 137 second-graders and 66 third-graders from the 2020–2021 and 2021–2022 academic years respectively. Detailed participant information is presented in Table 1. Of the 128 first graders, 67 were girls and 61 were boys. Seventy-two children spoke Mandarin at home, while 56 spoke Cantonese. The majority, 101 children (78.91 %), were born in Canada, while 27 children (21.09 %) were recent immigrants, having arrived in Canada within the past five years with their families. Socioeconomic status was determined by comparing families’ annual household income and parents’ educational backgrounds. Among the participants who disclosed the information, 92 children (71.88 %) came from non-low-income households. The demographic composition remained similar for second and third grades, though with smaller sample sizes in grade 3.

To further explore home digital practices and attitudes, children whose parents have agreed to interview for all three years were chosen as focal participants. In total, 42 focal children were chosen (see Table 2). The focal participants were evenly split by gender, with 50 % girls and 50 % boys. For the home language, 25 children spoke Mandarin (59.52 %) and 17 (40.49 %) spoke Cantonese. 26.19 % of children came from low-SES households (n = 11), while 73.81 % (n = 31) were from non-low-SES families. In terms of immigration status, most children (76.19 %, n = 32) were born in Canada, with 23.81 % (n = 10) being immigrants. The demographic compositions of focal children were similar to the larger sample in the first phrase.

3.2 Measures and Procedures

3.3 Data Analyses

4.1 Patterns of Digital Device Use and Chinese Receptive Vocabulary Achievement

Descriptive analyses were first conducted to explore the trends in children’s Chinese receptive vocabulary development and digital device use over three years. Table 3 shows the descriptive statistics and independent samples t-test results for children’s digital device use at Grade 1, Grade 2, and Grade 3. The mean scores for digital device use were similar across three grade levels, with Grade 2 having relatively higher frequency of usage (M = 1.24, SD = 1.25) while Grade 3 having the lowest frequency of usage (M = 1.06, SD = 1.07). In comparing the frequency of digital device usage between subgroups in each demographic category, we found no significant difference between subgroups in any category. The results reflected a similar pattern of digital device use frequency among subgroups.

Table 4 presents the descriptive statistics for children’s Chinese receptive vocabulary scores from Grade 1 to Grade 3. The mean vocabulary score was highest in Grade 2 (M = 100.10, SD = 22.51), indicating an improvement from Grade 1 (M = 93.63, SD = 17.60). However, there was an observed decline by Grade 3, where the mean score dropped to 89.44 (SD = 23.12). Based on the independent t-tests results, for all grade levels, children who spoke Mandarin as the home language scored significantly higher than those who spoke Cantonese at home; children who immigrated to Canada after birth scored significantly higher than those who were born in Canada in Grades 1 (t = 2.46, p < 0.05, Cohen’s d = 0.47) and 2 (t = 2.15, p < 0.05, Cohen’s d = 0.42), but not in Grade 3. Detailed information is shown in Table 4.

4.2 Relationships Between Digital Device Use and Receptive Vocabulary Development Over Time

A hierarchical regression analysis was conducted to provide a more detailed understanding of the relationship between digital device use and children’s Chinese receptive vocabulary (see Table 5). After controlling for demographic variables, including children’s age, gender, home languages, family socioeconomic status (SES), and immigration status, the findings presented that the frequency of digital device use had a statistically significant positive effect on Chinese receptive vocabulary development among first (β = 0.26, p < 0.01) and second graders (β = 0.20, p < 0.05). Further, the inclusion of digital device use as an independent variable accounted for an extra six percent of the total variance in Chinese receptive vocabulary in Grade 1 and an extra four percent of the total variance in Grade 2, indicating that in both grades, the frequency of digital device use plays a meaningful role beyond the demographic factors considered. To further understand the impact of digital device use frequency on Chinese receptive vocabulary knowledge, focal participants’ parental interviews over the three years were analyzed.

4.3 Family Practices and Factors that Contribute to the Impacts of Digital Device Use

By analyzing and comparing parental interviews across the three years, we explored home factors that emerged from the qualitative findings that contributed to the different impacts of digital devices on receptive vocabulary development across three grades, along with demographic differentiations that were shown to be influential in children’s use of digital devices.

4.4 Family Practices in Digital Device Use in Grade 1 and Grade 2

We identified four themes in family digital practices when children reached Grade 1 and Grade 2, which helped explain the significant positive impact of digital device use on Chinese receptive vocabulary, as well as the increases in digital use frequency and Chinese receptive vocabulary from Grade 1 to Grade 2.

First, some parents started to expose their children to digital devices as early as Grade 1 with the intention of “better than nothing.” The parents approached digital resources cautiously, limiting children’s digital activities to video calling on WeChat, watching adult-selected television programs, and using Chinese learning applications. Since many children had no speaking opportunities with others other than immediate family members, many parents perceived video calling with relatives to be “better than nothing at all” (Family 69 or F69, Boy, G1). The mother of F54 with a son in Grade 1 had the same feeling as she shared, “It helps. At least they can use [Chinese], right?” Some parents considered video calling a way to motivate children to learn the home language, and understand that “if you keep speaking only in English, your grandma won’t understand what you’re saying” (F52, Girl, G1). Parents of F52 also selected some Mandarin cartoons for the child to watch, and the child “picked up a little [Mandarin] from that”; sometimes, when the grandparents were watching Mandarin dramas, “she would watch too…she did learn to sing one of the songs [in the dramas]” (F52, Girl, G1).

The mother of F36 shared their positive experiences with watching cartoons. She once brought her child back to China for two weeks and did not “limit him from watching TV. He watched Chinese cartoons for at least 3 h each day. I think it made a huge difference…There’s a significant improvement in expression and understanding…I don’t think there’s anything else [that helped him learn Chinese].” Similarly, the parent of F47 had her children sit aside when “grandparents were watching news or TV dramas…so she would listen to more Chinese…although it’s probably less than an hour per week” (F47, Girl, G1). Parental interviews suggested that even minimal exposure to Chinese digital resources – regardless of whether they were designed for education purposes – can serve as effective input for children’s early acquisition of the home language in an English-dominant environment.

Secondly, as the COVID-19 pandemic prevailed during the second year of the study, most parents reported an increase in the use of digital devices. All participants in this study had children in Grade 1 or Grade 2 during the pandemic. Among the focal families, 11 of them had children at Grade 1 when the pandemic broke out and 33 of the focal children were at Grade 2. Notably, many of the resources added were in the heritage language Chinese. For instance, when asked if they had perceived changes in children’s Mandarin receptive skills, one mother stated that,

I feel that age has a big influence [on this], but the pandemic has brought a sudden change. The child has more free time now. If there was no pandemic, she would be out to take extracurricular classes or participate in sports activities…But now we don’t dare to let her go out, so she doesn’t have those activities anymore…Her free time is mainly spent communicating with her grandparents, video chatting on WeChat. She also spends time listening to [Mandarin] stories, so she may have learned some new words and [gained] a basic understanding of them. (F53, Girl, G2)

The mother of F78 also shared that they had the child watch more Cantonese cartoons at Grade 2, since “this year, we’ve been stuck at home and don’t have much to do.” She further commented that she “bought him (the child) a computer, camera, headphones” but she had never thought that “second grade would need these things” (F78, Boy, G2). However, when the mother was interviewed in the first year when the child was in Grade 1, she specifically mentioned that “we don’t watch TV at home”, and even though she knew “there might be some Cantonese programs for children”, she didn’t want the child to watch them.

Many other parents shared similar comparisons before and during the pandemic. One mother felt that “before the pandemic, the proportion of digital device use may have been a bit smaller. Now, it may have increased to around 30 % [of daily time] or even up to 50 %” (F80, Girl, G2). In F49, the mother “basically didn’t let her watch much” before the pandemic when she was in Grade 1, “but during the pandemic, it increased, we are using digital devices more” (F49, Girl, G2). The pandemic was a crucial context for the changes in digital device use in the first and second grades.

Thirdly, although the increased use of digital devices alone did not necessarily contribute to children’s Chinese receptive vocabulary knowledge, another theme that emerged in the parental interviews was the greater availability and diversity of digital resources to learn Chinese. The resources mentioned by the parents include online Chinese learning classes, online recorded Chinese lessons, Chinese learning websites and applications, audiobooks and e-books in Chinese, digital libraries, Chinese-English translation pens, Chinese television programs and cartoons, and Chinese social media platforms.

The online Chinese learning classes were the most mentioned resource in the focal families. The child of F47 started attending Chinese schools in kindergarten and “kept on attending online Chinese classes” (F47, Girl, G1) during the pandemic. The mother of F80 shared that she used to send her daughter to a local high school to learn Chinese when she was in Grade 1, but “[in Grade 2] it’s all online classes.” Several parents observed children’s improvement in Chinese through taking these online classes. One mother shared that her second-grade child enjoyed the online class, and “after learning with it, she (the child) recognized a lot of characters and learned many short phrases and was satisfied with her own progress” (F91, Girl, G2). The child of F18, a second grader, was also learning with a teacher from China at a popular online institution, and the mother noted that:

She’s gradually getting better at reading, recognizing some simple characters. She’ll look at the characters and point out what each one says. She’s already started recognizing some of the words… It has been quite useful. If it were me to teach her at home, I could never have made it. (F18, Girl, G2)

Besides the perceived progress in vocabulary knowledge and reading, some parents praised the availability of digital resources in allowing them access to the classes that suit their family’s needs. The child of F125 was learning online at a Chinese language school in another city. They had “tried classes with a few different teachers…but my daughter didn’t show much interest.” The online class they ended up choosing was “smaller, more interactive…also more affordable” (F125, Girl, G3). Other parents also specifically looked for “a teacher from mainland China” (F91, Boy, G2) or a very experienced and popular Chinese teacher living in another city with “classmates all over the U.S., Toronto, and Calgary” (F40, Boy, G2). These teacher and institution resources were only accessible thanks to digital platforms.

In addition to online Chinese classes, a few parents explored recordings of Chinese classrooms from mainland China that were accessible on YouTube or Chinese government’s official platforms. One mother explained to us that “the videos are the ones they have recorded with the teachers in China teaching that lesson, and there are students too, so I just let her watch those…I don’t have to teach that much myself” (F140, Girl, G3). Another mother found several videos “with animated content of instruction”, and she found them suitable for her child’s age as “they made the videos engaging, and she’s (the child) willing to sit through those.” (F118, Girl, G2)

Other diversified resources were present in these households. The mother of F118 found a set of Chinese learning videos from an unknown website, but she felt that her son “[learned] it quite quickly”. Each video “had a picture, and the teacher taught him through it”. After watching the videos for a few days, the boy “had learned a few characters. He would write them out and show me”, and “tell me what he learned” (F118, Boy, G1). Several parents mentioned Chinese learning applications, most of which are developed by Chinese companies but made available online. Children can learn “pinyin, characters, and phrases” with instructions and games on them, together with “books which the child can read repeatedly” (F150, Boy, G2). Audiobooks were another popular type of digital resource. Since children did not have to look at digital devices all the time while listening, the parents allowed them “to use iPad quite frequently for listening to stories” (F145, Girl, G2). The mother commented that these diversified resources were useful for children’s Chinese learning “because, at home, the conversations we have with her are just the same things over and over again” while “the books may be better” as effective language input. This supports previous findings that digital resources can compensate for limitations in home language environments (Jing et al. 2023).

Similar to observations in previous studies (Sun and Yin 2020), with diversified digital resources, many children were interacting with multimedia and several digital devices at the same time. For example, when asked what resources they have used to help improve the child’s Chinese, the mother of F159 listed “applications on the phone to help him learn and recognize characters”, “the Chinese version of TikTok”, “calling grandparents on WeChat” and also taking online Chinese classes (F159, Boy, G2). Another mother shared the resources they have used, including online classes, applications, audiobooks, and movies:

I think the most effective method is to have them take online classes because I feel the teachers teaching the classes will be more effective than me teaching them. And now there are a lot of diverse online courses…Some are in the form of games, or have many fun ways of learning…I’ve also had them listen to some radio broadcasts and some of those Chinese apps that have audiobooks… They have a lot of classic literature, detective novels, that kind of thing…It’s also very effective for their Chinese learning. Including some Chinese movies, I’ve had them watch those in Chinese and then explained it to them. (F48, Boy, G2)

As this mother highlighted, these resources may serve as more effective teachers than parents themselves, providing diverse, interesting ways of learning and language input in various forms for children to learn their heritage language.

Finally, the fourth theme pointed to both parents’ and children’s better understanding of digital devices and their effective use of them. Among the parents, many shared how the understanding facilitated their detailed management of digital device use. For F78, the mother managed her son’s digital exposure by not allowing any devices except TV watching in the first year. Her son “didn’t have an iPad”; and with the phone, she told him that they “had no WiFi or the phone was out of battery”. She also “tried to limit TV at home as much as [she] could” (F78, Boy, G1). In the second year, when asked about the digital device use at home, she shared that “he watched more TV” but she “didn’t give him the tablet as much”, because “the TV was bigger. And he just watched things like Treehouse and Disney cartoons. But with a tablet, he could explore a lot more…So if he asks, [she’d] rather just put on the TV, because [she] would know what he was watching” (F78, Boy, G2). With more exposure to different devices, the mother formed the knowledge of how devices may differ in management efforts and developed different management strategies with diverse devices.

Likewise, numerous other families had also explored management strategies. One mother shared how she managed the purposes of children’s digital device use. She said that she “had a strict rule. On weekdays, they may use the computer or iPad, but the purpose would be either for taking online classes…or to do homework on Teams^[1]” (F53, Girl, G2). Some parents developed their digital literacy to assist and manage children’s digital practices. The mother of F150 shared that she would sit next to her son during Zoom classes so “he could stay focused”. She observed that the child often “played with the Zoom functions, like raising hands, changing the background, or writing on it” (F150, Boy, G2); and she would learn to manage these little features. Another mother mentioned that she would help the child select learning content inside a specific application. The application was not specially designed for education but the content “was actually quite extensive, you have to explore it yourself and find the parts that you want to use” (F53, Girl, G2). She selected some “literacy learning” and “some poems with really nice illustrations” for the child to watch.

A few parents noticed how their children developed digital literacy and took agency in learning in the digital platforms. One mother proudly shared that her son “could make his own videos and post them [on the Chinese version of TikTok], and get people to like them” (F159, Boy, G2). The boy also taught his mother how to make the video in Chinese, taking his role as the guide and teacher. Another parent shared that sometimes when she didn’t understand certain English content, her child “would use the computer to translate it into Chinese to help [her]” (F115, Girl, G2). Though the participants were at a young age, we were able to observe their agentive practices with Chinese digital resources, which has been proven to be beneficial for heritage language learning (Smith and Li 2022). The developing digital literacy of both children and parents may guarantee a higher degree of parental engagement and child active interactions with digital devices, facilitating children’s language learning.

4.5 Practices in Digital Device Use in Grade 3

In parental interviews, we observed two themes that may explain the lack of digital use impact on Chinese receptive vocabulary development in Grade 3. Firstly, with more progress in children’s Chinese language learning, parents did show positive attitudes toward digital resources from the first year to the second year. However, as more students reached Grade 3, some parents reverted to hesitations or adopted a more neutral stance on the use of digital devices. Further, children returned to in-person schooling this year which may also have reduced the time and frequency of their digital device use for Chinese learning.

Take F92 for example, when the child was in Grade 2, the interviewer asked about the role of digital devices and the mother commented, “They were all important, because especially during the pandemic, if you didn’t have Zoom or other messaging apps, you wouldn’t be able to communicate with others.” However, in the third year, although she recognized digital resources as helpful for children’s learning, she preferred “in-person learning” to online learning, because with online learning, “there’s something that can’t be replicated at home with online learning” She added that “the effectiveness of online learning was a bit less” (F92, Boy, G3).

Similarly, in the third year of the interviews, several parents demonstrated a more neutral opinion of digital device use. The mother of F54 explained both sides of her consideration:

It’s really a combination of the pandemic situation and the available resources that led to us choosing more online classes. It’s not that I particularly prefer this mode – in-person is definitely better… The impact is positive, as long as it’s under adult supervision. The challenge is controlling the time spent – that’s quite difficult. I’ve seen many kids having to wear glasses after being at home for months during the pandemic. That worries me…The issue is more about management, not the technology itself. (F54, Boy, G3)

Another mother shared similar evaluations of digital device use as she emphasized that “whether it facilitates or hinders depends on how you use it”. She wanted to pass on to her child the view that “digital devices are just tools, which can help us in many different ways. But if you use them inappropriately, or if you turn them into pure entertainment tools and become addicted to them, then that’s not good.” (F53, Girl, G2) From discovering the benefits of digital resources to forming a neutral view, parents’ shifting attitudes toward digital devices presented a heightened awareness of their own engagements in influencing the learning results.

Secondly, some parents did report issues around eye health and possible addictions to digital devices, particularly during the third year. These concerns might help explain why the positive impacts of digital device use on vocabulary development disappeared in third grade. Health issues appeared to be a major concern for the parents, which resulted in a decrease in digital device use in some families. When asked about the role of digital devices, one mother commented, “It was helpful. But the negative impact is on the eyes, it can cause short-sightedness.” She added that she “did download some (language learning apps) before, but stopped letting [her son] use them because his eyes got worse” (F69, Boy, G3). The mother of F118 shared in year-three interview the similar worry “about the impact on his eyesight” and further attributed it to addictions, “Before, I could still control it a bit, but now after the pandemic and online classes, he can’t control himself at all… When the weather is nice, I’ll say let’s go out for a walk. But he doesn’t even want to go. He’s already so addicted.” Another mother was also concerned about her child’s excessive exposure to digital devices after the pandemic:

Interviewer (I): Has the pandemic caused the frequency of children using digital devices to increase?

Mother (M): It’s completely out of control…

I: Are there any issues with it now, in terms of using digital devices?

M: Yes, it’s easy to start but hard to stop, you understand what I mean…I’ve tried to control the time … it’s very difficult. If I’m not watching him, he’ll… even if I take them away, he’ll find a way to get them back. No matter where I hide them, he can find them. I don’t know what to do… (F94, Boy, G3)

F125 also expressed heightened concerns about the child’s digital exposure. In the second year when the child was in Grade 2, the mother mainly expressed positive views toward digital devices and thought “it’s very helpful”, while in the third year, she talked about the challenge that her child “just kept watching short videos over and over again” and that “during online classes, the child could not concentrate” (F125, Girl, G3). Due to these parental concerns, parents started to curb the children’s prolonged exposure to digital devices in the third year and opt for in-person activities after the pandemic, which may explain the decrease in average digital device use in Grade 3. As children spent more time on entertainment with digital devices and parents gradually allowed less time on digital devices overall, the positive impact of digital device use on heritage language development may have diminished.

4.6 Influences of Home Languages and Immigration Status

In addition to changes across grades in the impact of digital device use on Chinese receptive vocabulary development, we observed significant differences between vocabulary acquisition of Mandarin-speaking families and Cantonese-speaking families across three grades, and between those who immigrated after birth and children who were born in Canada in Grade 1 and Grade 2. Although there were no significant differences in the frequency of digital device use among these groups, we did observe different patterns in their reported family digital practices for heritage language learning.

Both Mandarin-speaking and Cantonese-speaking families were exposed to digital resources in Mandarin. Some Cantonese-speaking families shared that they did not specifically look for resources in Mandarin, but children would be exposed to them when “grandparents watched the news – the channels were in Mandarin” (F47, Girl, G1), and when children watched “Chinese cartoon channels, those were in Mandarin” (F52, Girl G1). The parent of F154 shared that, while they used Cantonese at home, “Mandarin is like this…When they go out, they play with friends or watch TV. They see the shows they like, and then they want to learn a bit. When they understand what others are saying, there’s this natural desire to learn [Mandarin] that comes naturally” (F154, Girl, G2).

Some other Cantonese parents had the desire themselves and intentionally selected Mandarin resources for their children. The mother of F91 sent her child to both language class and painting class in Mandarin, believing “it is helpful for her Mandarin development”. She thought “Mandarin is used quite broadly nowadays” and “taught her (the child) Mandarin from scratch” (F91, Girl, G3) since very young. In comparison, “the exposure to Cantonese was the least” for the child (F91, Girl, G2). Likewise, F62 chose Mandarin over Cantonese. The mother was “originally from Guangzhou city”, where Cantonese is the mother tongue, but she raised her child speaking Mandarin and “gave up on speaking Cantonese with her (the child). Ever since she was born, I started speaking to her in Mandarin” (F62, Girl, G2). She also registered on a language learning application in Mandarin and simplified Chinese for her child.

Either with incidental input from Mandarin digital resources or intentional input selected by the parents, Cantonese-speaking children were not only dealing with one additional language other than English but both Mandarin and Cantonese. It might require extra effort for them to progress in either of the languages. It is possible that, through digital devices and platforms, languages in more dominant status were shaping and influencing home language environments more seamlessly, which further complicated heritage language learning for Cantonese-speaking children.

Regarding immigration status, we observed that immigrant families in general leveraged their transnational resources more than families who had their children born in Canada. As digital platforms have mitigated the limits of physical distance, these parents were acutely aware that they “can access them (the courses from China) through digital devices…It allows you to learn in many new ways and access a lot of learning content” (F48, Boy, G2). The mother of F91 found a Chinese teacher from China to teach her child during the pandemic, and F15 also sent the child to online Chinese classes from China because “he could not learn some words in daily communication here (in Canada), so the class would specifically teach him certain Chinese characters.” (F15, Boy, G2) One parent explained to us that “there are too many Chinese courses available, but I think the ones for overseas kids are too simple. I believe learning Chinese should follow the original, authentic way, so we chose to learn with the method in China.” (F69, Boy, G3) These parents might have higher expectations of the authenticity of how their children learn Chinese, so they opted for digital resources available in their home country.

Interestingly, some parents mentioned online math classes in Chinese in children’s digital device use. The mother of F15 had her child learning math online with textbooks from China, and the mother of F48 also registered online math and logic classes provided in Chinese for her child. One father described the Chinese math class they were taking: “The critical thinking programs in it are quite different from the ones in North America…The American approach is probably more open and flexible…Ours [The Chinese approach] is more complex” (F16, Boy, G2). One mother added, “I felt the math taught here is too simple. The course we took in China is kind of like an extension [to school learning] …And during the process of learning, he’s been working on listening, speaking, reading, and writing [in Chinese]” (F36, M, G1). As previous studies have observed the gaps in academic aspirations among Asian immigrant families (Li and Sun 2019), it is plausible to suggest that these families’ expectations of math learning were higher than the school progress, and thus they were more motivated to take online math classes in Chinese, which in turn provided additional opportunities for children to understand and to speak the language.