The integration of affective characteristics of the family environment for a more comprehensive explanatory model of reading abilities
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction This research focuses on the influence of familial affective characteristics on family literacy practices and children’s reading abilities. Parenting stress and educational practices were two affective characteristics of interest. Parenting stress is defined as a state of psychological discomfort specifically associated with the education of a child whereas educational practices are defined as various means the parent uses to educate and socialize the child. Methods A sample of 154 grade 1 children allowed for a correlational analysis between parenting stress, educational practices, the frequency of family reading activities, the diversity of literacy material available and the type of child-parent exchange (alphabet-focus or story-focus). Regression analyses were conducted to develop a model predicting reading abilities. Results Three result outcomes are of interest for the field of reading development. First, our study establishes relations between educational practices and certain aspects of family literacy: diversity of supports, frequency of exchanges, and type of child-parent exchange and it suggests that parental engagement plays a significant role in various aspects related to at-home discussions about books. Second, our regression analysis highlights evidence that parenting stress is an explanatory factor directly linked to the child’s reading abilities. Therefore, our findings add reading abilities to the list of developmental aspects that is affected by parenting stress. Finally, the results show that, when parenting stress and educational practices are integrated in the predictive model, the story-focus exchanges remain predictive of reading abilities but not the alphabet-focus exchanges. Discussion Our findings confirm that the benefit of parent–child exchange on reading abilities is dependent of conditions of the family environment in which these activities occur. These findings also lead us to question the value of making alphabet-focus exchanges, the cornerstone of some literacy programs in family settings. Our findings call for caution when implementing such programs in family context. In fact, activities involving conversation about the meaning of a text or the links between the text and the child’s everyday reality represent the only activities, in our study, that had a beneficial effect on reading abilities while remaining permeable to parenting stress.
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 | 0,000 | 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 | 0,000 |
| 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 ».