Research on Status quo of Fine Motor Skill of Children Aged 3 to 6: Case Analysis of Kindergartens in Nanchong, Sichuan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>By combining methods of survey with questionnaire, the author investigated the situation of fine motor skill of 330 children aged 3 to 6 in the junior, middle and senior groups of 11 kindergartens in three districts of Nanchong City, and conducted questionnaire on the children’s parents’ educational attitude toward fine motor. The survey data analyzed by SPSS shows that children’s fine motor skill in Nanchong is improved as they are growing older; that their development of drawing, folding and cutting fine motor skill is relatively weaker; that there are some differences in skill level between genders, kindergarten categories and native places. The kindergartens should develop curriculum for development of children’s fine motor. In “Motor development” objectives of<em> Learning and Development Guideline for Children Aged 3 to 6</em>, gender factor of affecting fine motor skill should be added. The kindergarten shall conduct differentiated instruction on boy’s and girl’s fine motor skill. Teachers and parents shall jointly support children’s operation and exploration activities of fine motor, to contain training in life and to achieve family-kindergarten cooperation and to promote children’s fine motor skill hand in hand.</p>
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".