Reading comprehension skills of grade 7 students who are learning English as a second language
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reading comprehension is a multi-dimensional process that includes the reader, the text, and factors associated with the activity of reading. Most research and theories of comprehension are based primarily on research conducted with monolingual English speakers (L1). Thus, it is important to investigate the cognitive and linguistic factors that have an influence on reading comprehension of English-as-a-Second-Language (ESL) speakers, especially during the higher grades, when there is a shift from “learning to read” to” reading to learn”. This study examined the cognitive aspects of reading comprehension among L1 and ESL speakers in the seventh grade. The performance of both groups was compared and the role of relevant processes, including, memory, phonological awareness, morphological and syntactic awareness, word reading and fluency was assessed. Three comprehension groups were examined: (1) children with poor comprehension in the absence of word reading difficulties, (2) children with poor word reading and poor comprehension, and (3) children with good word reading and comprehension abilities. ESL and the L1 students in grade 7 performed in a similar way on all the reading comprehension measures, word reading and underlying cognitive measures. Only on two language related measures, syntactic awareness and working memory for words, the L1 students performed better than the ESL. Similar prevalence of reading comprehension subgroups was found for ESL and L1 students, with under 2 percent of students classified as reading disabled. The profile of students with poor comprehension was presented as well as profile of students with poor reading skills. Implications for identification of reading comprehension subgroups and for reading comprehension programs were discussed. In addition, the role of the school psychologist in relation to reading comprehension skills was presented.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".