MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168085280 · doi:10.1177/002221940003300507

Putting Struggling Readers on the PHAST Track

2000· review· en· W2168085280 on OpenAlexaff
Maureen W. Lovett, Léa Lacerenza, Susan L. Borden

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Learning Disabilities · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicReading and Literacy Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
KeywordsRemedial educationReading (process)PsychologyMetacognitionContext (archaeology)Identification (biology)Learning to readLearning disabilityPhonological awarenessComputer scienceMathematics educationLiteracyPedagogyCognitionLinguisticsDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PHAST (for Phonological and Strategy Training) is a research-based remedial reading program that attempts to capitalize upon current research on reading disabilities and their remediation. The focus of the program is on the primary obstacles to word identification learning and independent decoding that most disabled readers face and the steps necessary to help these children achieve independent reading skills. A framework of phonologically based remediation was used as a foundation upon which a set of flexible and effective word identification strategies were scaffolded in an integrated developmental sequence. The program uses a combination of direct instruction and dialogue-based metacognitive training, with the pedagogical emphasis shifting from an initial direct instruction, remedial focus to increasingly metacognitive-strategy-based methods. A continuum of intervention over 70 hours provides both (a) remediation of the basic phonological awareness and letter-sound-learning deficits of disabled readers and (b) specific training of five word identification strategies that offer different approaches to the decoding of unfamiliar words and exposure to different levels of subsyllabic segmentation. Explicit instruction in the application and monitoring of multiple word identification strategies and their application to text-reading activities continues throughout the PHAST Program. PHAST training provides the disabled reader with the opportunity to become a flexible reader who approaches new words in or out of context with multiple strategies and has the ability to evaluate the success of their application. The PHAST Program was developed following the controlled evaluation of its components in laboratory classroom settings and recent positive results from their sequential combination. PHAST represents a new integrated approach to programming in this area using instructional components that have already demonstrated their efficacy with children with severe reading disabilities.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.008

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations126
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Learning DisabilitiesSame topicReading and Literacy DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207