MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987200316 · doi:10.1080/01443410903165391

Kindergarten school readiness and fourth‐grade literacy and numeracy outcomes of children with special needs: a population‐based study

2009· article· en· W1987200316 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jennifer E. V. Lloyd, Lori G. Irwin, Clyde Hertzman

Bibliographic record

VenueEducational Psychology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaLearning Partnership
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of British ColumbiaMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsNumeracyLiteracyPsychologyPopulationDevelopmental psychologyMathematics educationSpecial needsData collectionSpecial educationMedical educationPedagogyMedicineStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In British Columbia, Canada, two population‐based databases have been linked at the level of the individual child: the Early Development Instrument, a Kindergarten school readiness measure; and the Foundation Skills Assessment, a Grade Four academic assessment. Utilising these linked data, we explored the early school readiness, literacy, and numeracy outcomes of a province‐wide study population of children with special needs (N = 3677) followed longitudinally from Kindergarten to Grade Four. In particular, we explored the categories of special needs among our study population. In addition, we investigated the Kindergarten school readiness and Grade Four literacy and numeracy outcomes of children with special needs. We also explored the Grade Four literacy and numeracy outcomes of children with special needs who were ‘not school ready’ at Kindergarten. Finally, we identified the categories of special needs of children who participated in the Kindergarten data collection, but were missing literacy and numeracy scores at Grade Four. Future directions are discussed.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.682
Threshold uncertainty score0.640

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.345
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations42
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEducational PsychologySame topicInfant Development and Preterm CareFrench-language works237,207