MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971548888 · doi:10.1080/02702710308233

THE INFLUENCE OF A READING AND WRITING CURRICULUM ON TRANSFER LEARNING ACROSS SUBJECTS AND GRADES

2003· article· en· W1971548888 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueReading Psychology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicReading and Literacy Development
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumPsychologyReading (process)Mathematics educationSocial studiesPedagogyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined the influence of an innovative reading and writing curriculum on the expository writing and content learning of middle grade students. In Study One, students of teachers who were highly knowledgeable of the curriculum design wrote significantly better essays than students of less knowledgeable teachers. In Study Two, students transferred knowledge and strategies learned in the innovative curriculum to the writing of geography essays throughout the school year. Study Three found that 21% of the variance in the text-based content of Grade 8 social studies essays could be accounted for by text structure knowledge acquired in Grade 7.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.172
Threshold uncertainty score0.705

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.330 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it