Characteristics of Speech Errors Produced by Children With and Without Delayed Phonological Awareness Skills
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between the types of speech errors that are produced by children with speech-sound disorders and the children's phonological awareness skills during their prekindergarten and kindergarten years. METHOD: Fifty-eight children with speech-sound disorders were assessed during the spring of their prekindergarten year and then again at the end of their kindergarten year. The children's responses on the Goldman-Fristoe Test of Articulation (R. Goldman & M. Fristoe, 2000) were described in terms of match ratios for the features of each target sound and the type of error produced. Match ratios and error type frequencies were then examined as a function of the child's performance on a test of phonological awareness. RESULTS: Lower match ratios for +distributed and higher frequencies of typical syllable structure errors and atypical segment errors were associated with poorer phonological awareness test performance. However, no aspect of the children's error patterns proved to be a reliable indicator of which individual child would pass or fail the test. The best predictor of test performance at the end of the kindergarten year was test performance 1 year earlier. Children who achieved age-appropriate articulation skills by the end of kindergarten also achieved age-appropriate phonological awareness skills. CONCLUSION: Children who enter kindergarten with delayed articulation skills should be monitored to ensure age-appropriate acquisition of phonological awareness and literacy skills.
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 | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".