Bibliographic record
Abstract
This cross-sectional survey study was designed to investigate secondary teachers' beliefs, attitudes and reported practices related to content area reading and strategy instruction. The survey was conducted with 119 teacher leaders in eighteen secondary schools in a large multicultural school district in Western Canada during the spring of 2004. Respondents were selected because of their subject area expertise and leadership role in the field. Key findings were that respondents: (a) identified struggling readers in their classes as predominately male and typically in grades 8-10; (b) indicated that students struggled with comprehension and critical reading skills; (c) identified external factors as hindrances to students' successful literacy development; (d) indicated inadequate knowledge of content area reading instructional strategies; (e) reported a limited range of assessment tools used; and (f) identified obstacles related to, and a need for, programs and professional development that address the needs of struggling readers. It is concluded that there are three key areas of knowledge that teachers need in order to help students read content area materials: (a) knowledge of assessment tools that will help them identify areas in which their students struggle; (b) knowledge of content reading strategies that are integrated into disciplinary teaching, together with formative assessment that will support instructional decision-making; and (c) long-term and situated professional development programs in content area reading and strategy instruction that are sensitive to the context of their professional lives and that facilitate learning communities in schools.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".