Turning boys off? Listening to what five‐year‐olds say about reading
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper reports the first part of a 2‐year longitudinal study, which examined the impact of age of entry to school on the reading development of 60 summer‐born boys during Key Stage One. The sample was drawn from 18 schools in six Local Education Authorities operating different admissions policies. Thirty‐one had attended nursery part‐time, while 29 had experienced full‐time reception class before their fifth birthday and before statutory age of entry to school. The data offer an original portrayal of learning to read through the voices of a group of 5‐year‐old boys as they reflected on home and school literacy events relating to reading. Reading acquisition was examined within a theoretical model which incorporates attitudinal factors as intrinsic and defining components of reading literacy. The data draw attention to the centrality of these factors in the complex structure which supports the process of reading acquisition, acknowledging the need to investigate this process from the perspective of the child. This paper discusses the findings in the context of the boys' early years experience and the implications in the light of the widespread debate about age of entry to school and appropriate early years practice. The data suggest the current wide‐spread skills‐based approach to reading often ignores the crucial motivational elements that make a real reader and that the formality associated with this approach may be damaging reading attitudes in the youngest children of our reception classes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".