The effect of training in gross motor and fine motor skills on the improvement of reading in a selected group of grade one students.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of special motor training on a group of grade one pupils who were having difficulty in reading. Ten grade one students were selected from the Sir Richard McBride Elementary School in Vancouver. These pupils were classed as potentially poor readers on the basis of the Metropolitan Reading Readiness Test and the Winter Haven Perceptual Copy Forms Test. A matched group of ten pupils, which would act as a control group, was selected from the Annex to the McBride School. The two groups were matched according to age, sex, and the results of the reading readiness s test and the perceptual form test. The experimental group received sixteen weeks of special motor training which was carried on for one hour a day, five days a week. At the completion of the training period all subjects were given the Stanford Achievement Test and the Winter Haven Perceptual Form Test. The differences between the means of the raw scores of the two groups were statistically analyzed. The t-test was used and the t required for significance at the .05 level of confidence was 2.10. The t's obtained indicated a very significant improvement of the experimental group over the control group in reading ability. The following indicated the obtained t on each item of the reading test plus the perceptual form test. 1. Word Meaning 10.38 2. Paragraph Meaning 5.35 3. Spelling 5.83 4. Word Study Skills 4.04 5. Perceptual Form 11.11 There was no significant difference in vocabulary. Because of certain experimental conditions which could not be controlled, it could not definitely be indicated that the improvement was due entirely to the motor skills program. The apparent lack of direct relationship between levels of perceptual ability and reading achievement raises several questions. Further information is needed before the reason for apparent differences between improvement in perceptual and reading skills following a special motor training program can be understood.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».