Enhancing vocabulary, print awareness and phonological awareness through shared storybook reading with low-income preschoolers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current study compares the effects of two shared storybook reading (SSR) interventions on language and emergent literacy skills of low-income preschoolers. The control intervention targeted language and print awareness, skills for which there is strong evidence of the effect of SSR. The experimental intervention added a focus on phonological awareness, a skill for which there is less evidence of the effect of SSR. Following the interventions, results indicated that the experimental group ( n = 10) outperformed the control group ( n = 13) on phonological awareness scores, but not on vocabulary and print awareness scores. The study also compared the outcomes of the experimental intervention for the low-income participants with the skills of higher-income preschoolers who did not receive intervention. The low-income children in the experimental condition outperformed their higher-income peers ( n = 12) on all three measures. The experimental intervention offers promising techniques for SSR activities in childcare centres.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".