MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159416005 · doi:10.5539/jedp.v2n1p80

An Examination of Kindergarten Core-Reading Instruction in the United States

2012· article· en· W2159416005 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mary Beth Marr, Bob Algozzine, Kate Algozzine, Shawnna Helf

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Educational and Developmental Psychology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicReading and Literacy Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of North Carolina at CharlotteU.S. Department of Education
KeywordsReading (process)LiteracyPsychologyLanguage artsIntervention (counseling)Mathematics educationPedagogyMedical educationPolitical scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prevention, intervention, and research efforts are grounded in a belief that teachers should only use alternative educational practices after reasonable evidence has indicated that general education practices implemented with a high degree of integrity have been unsuccessful. To investigate levels of implementation of an evidence-based primary reading program, we observed teachers’ use of Open Court, a commercially-available core reading program, during the district-mandated two-hour literacy block. We found that the amount and type of literacy and language arts instruction children received varied across classrooms. We discuss the implications of our work for future research and the improvement of childhood education practices.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.256
Threshold uncertainty score0.510

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.327 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations8
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Educational and Developmental PsychologySame topicReading and Literacy DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207