An investigation of Grade 5 children's knowledge of the doubling rule in spelling
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The goal of this study was to investigate Grade 5 children's knowledge of a common word pattern in English, to double the final consonant of a one‐syllable word when adding – ed . Significant correlations were found between – ed spelling and general spelling ability, as well as correct pronunciation of – ed words in isolated word reading and spelling. The correlation between – ed spelling and – ed word reading ( r =0.31) is lower than one would expect to find in general spelling and reading ability. Individual interviews were conducted to assess children's explicit awareness of the doubling rule, followed by a measure of consistency in spelling a selected number of – ed words. Performance on an artificial grammar task indicated a correlation between implicit learning of nonsense letter strings and spelling ability. Overall results point to the unstable nature of children's knowledge of the doubling rule . Implications for instruction 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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it