MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2085151660 · doi:10.5539/res.v6n3p17

Variations in Arabic Reading Skills between Normally Achieving and at Risk for Reading Disability Students in Second and Fourth Grades

2014· article· en· W2085151660 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mahmoud Mohamed Emam, Ali Mahdi Kazem, Taghreed T. Al-Said, Raya Al-Monzery

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of European Studies · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicReading and Literacy Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSultan Qaboos University
KeywordsPsychologyReading (process)ArabicReading comprehensionActive listeningOrthographyVariation (astronomy)Phonological awarenessMathematics educationWord recognitionDevelopmental psychologyLinguisticsLiteracyPedagogyCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study investigated variations in Arabic reading skills between normally achieving students and students at risk for reading disability in second and fourth grades. Using a cross-sectional design the study tested the effect of gender, grade level, and student condition on the variation of Arabic reading skills. Participants were 381 Arabic speaking children from second and fourth grades. Participants included both normally achieving students and students who were referred to the Learning Disabilities Unit in elementary schools in Oman. Dependent measures of the study included letter sound identification (LSI), word decoding (WD), phonological awareness (PA) through blending and segmentation, word recognition (WR), reading comprehension (RC), and listening comprehension (LC) in Arabic. Multivariate analysis indicated that gender, grade level and student condition had an effect on variation of reading skills. Additionally, the interaction effect of grade level and student condition as well as the combination of the three independent variables showed similar effects. Significant reading skills varied according to gender, grade level and student condition in addition to the interaction effects. WD, LSI and LC were significant as a result of the interaction effects. The results are discussed in relation to the characteristics of the Arabic language orthography.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.601

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations11
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of European StudiesSame topicReading and Literacy DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207