MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2182496856

Upper Grade Level Literacy: Instructional Strategies for Struggling Readers

2014· article· en· W2182496856 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Claire M. Shaw

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicReading and Literacy Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReading (process)LiteracyMathematics educationQuarter (Canadian coin)PedagogyPassionPsychologyPolitical scienceHistorySocial psychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Education research has shown that a quarter of eighth-grade students perform below basic reading proficiency. Despite this, reading instruction often ceases after eighth grade while text structure and content area language become more difficult. This research project focuses on studying strategies used for struggling readers in seventh through twelfth grade and includes a case study of a struggling reader in order to identify some of the characteristics and needs of struggling readers. This research synthesizes ideas from previous studies, analyzes teacher interviews for literacy instruction strategies and, in the case study, uses observation, primary source study, and reading assessments. Acknowledgements I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Treavor Bogard, for his assistance throughout this long process. Without him, this would be a very disorganized and poorly worded mess. I would also like to thank Dr. Patricia Hart and Dr. Carissa Krane, who gave me the opportunity to begin this research project and find my passion.

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)0.004
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.288 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReading and Literacy Development→French-language works237,207→