Reading Preferences and Strategies Employed by Primary School Students: Gender, Socio-Cognitive and Citizenship Issues
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the present study was to identify the correlation between gender and reading preferences and reading strategies employed by 5th and 6th Grade students of primary school in Greece. The main objectives of the present study were (1) to identify possible differences between male and female students in employing cognitive and metacognitive strategies, (2) to record the difficulties encountered by males and females when reading and (3) to highlight possible differences between male and female students in reading preferences. 405 Greek students (206 boys and 199 girls, M=11.21 years old, SD.=0.47) participated in the study and were asked to fill in a questionnaire including questions related to reading preferences and attitudes. In addition, 32 students from the total sample were asked to choose their favourite text to read and think aloud about the processes they followed and the strategies they used. The questionnaire results indicated significant differences between male and female students in reading preferences, since the female students showed a greater preference for ‘human-interest’ stories and male ones preferred to read comics and action-stories. The verbal data revealed the female students’ flexibility in strategy use and their higher metacognitive awareness compared to male students. Reading, gender and social factors are discussed in the light of citizenship education.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".