MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143334586 · doi:10.1177/0022219413509970

Morphological Awareness and Vocabulary Development Among Kindergarteners With Different Ability Levels

2013· article· en· W2143334586 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Learning Disabilities · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicReading and Literacy Development
Canadian institutionsThompson Rivers University
FundersHarvard Graduate School of Education
KeywordsVocabularyPsychologyVocabulary developmentDisadvantagedDevelopmental psychologyContext (archaeology)Intervention (counseling)Mathematics educationTeaching methodLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Our goal was to investigate the growth of vocabulary and morphological awareness over time in the context of an intervention for kindergartners with different ability levels in these skills. Participants in this exploratory study were 108 children from schools serving socioeconomically disadvantaged neighborhoods. Results indicated that children significantly improved their morphological awareness skills and vocabulary over a period of 4 months ( eta(p)(2) = .61 for morphological awareness and eta(p)(2) = .53 for vocabulary), with the greatest gains made by children who were initially low on these measures. Morphological awareness and vocabulary skills were reciprocally related; each made a unique contribution to growth in the other. The results suggest that it may be beneficial to combine instruction in vocabulary and morphological awareness and that kindergarten teachers can successfully do so with guidance.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.253 · 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