MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2185700736 · doi:10.36510/learnland.v3i1.317

Making the Invisible Process Visible: A Kinesthetic Approach to Explicit Reading Comprehension Strategy Instruction in Early Primary Grades

2009· article· en· W2185700736 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Sarah Kingsley

Bibliographic record

VenueLEARNing Landscapes · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicReading and Literacy Development
Canadian institutionsSt. Lawrence College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKinesthetic learningReading comprehensionComprehensionReading (process)Meaning (existential)Process (computing)Computer sciencePsychologyFocus (optics)Mathematics educationCognitive psychologyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reading instruction in early primary grades tends to focus on segmenting words into sounds and there is little emphasis on explicitly teaching reading comprehension strategies.Through a kinesthetic approach, I attempted to make the invisible process of applying reading comprehension strategies visible. Students used a remote, similar to that of a TV, to play and pause their reading process.This enabled them to effectively use meaning-making strategies which took shape through signaling. Students would physically motion to themselves various signs which indicated the four reading comprehension strategies modeled in my think alouds (visualization, questioning, making predictions and making connections). The outcome was a highly motivated group of grade one students who could apply reading comprehension strategies and engage in discourse that reflected a higher level of understanding.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.494
Threshold uncertainty score0.675

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLEARNing LandscapesSame topicReading and Literacy DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207