Using Singing and Movement to Teach Pre-reading Skills and Word Reading to Kindergarten Children: An Exploratory Study
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
Kindergarten classrooms were randomly assigned to a songs group (n = 44) that used choral singing and movement to teach phonological skills, letter-sounds, and word reading, or to a control group (n = 49) where children received their regular language and literacy programs for equal amounts of time. The songs group teaching involved choral singing and movements created for the project to teach phonological skills, letter-sounds, and word reading. Children preferred songs that were quick to learn, had strong or soothing rhythms, and incorporated movements. Children in the songs group had increased letter-sounds, medial phoneme identity and word reading compared to children in the control group. Children in both groups made equal gains in rhyming and identifying phonemes in initial and final positions. Songs group children also read new words not presented in the songs program. Initial and medial phoneme identity and letter-sound knowledge made independent contributions to word reading.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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