Children's early home learning environment and learning outcomes in the early years of school
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A large body of research has shown that the quality of the home learning environment during a child’s first three years of life is associated not only with cognitive development at age 4–5 years but also with educational achievement at school and beyond. A poor home learning environment, for example, has been shown to be associated, in the short term, with poorer language development, deficits in school readiness and impaired cognitive development by the age of 3 (Evans et al., 2010; Trentacosta et al., 2008; Vernon-Feagans, Garrett-Peters, Willoughby, & Mills-Koonce, 2012). In the long term, it is associated with poor academic achievement at school and lower levels of education, employment and earnings in adulthood (Pungello, Iruka, Dotterer, Mills-Koonce, & Reznick, 2009; Pungello et al., 2010). Different features of the home learning environment have been found to have different influences on early cognitive development (Gest, Freeman, Domitrovich, & Welsh, 2004; Hartas, 2012; Melhuish et al., 2008). Therefore, to develop effective interventions, researchers have focused on identifying the features of a stimulating home learning environment and the individual contribution of those features to children’s cognitive development and learning outcomes (Baker & Iruka, 2013). Many studies have examined the relationship between different types of home activities (as a proxy for the home learning environment) and children’s cognitive development (Sylva, Melhuish, Sammons, Siraj-Blatchford, & Taggart, 2004). An activity such as parent–child play during daily routines promotes the expression of warm feelings and shared understanding, which are important for the development of communication abilities in early childhood. For example, in a study of 132 low-income families in the United States, Camp, Cunningham, and Berman (2010) showed that child–parent verbal interactions when children were between 10 and 18 months old were significantly related to the children’s expressive vocabulary at the age of 18–30 months. The importance of home learning experiences to children’s numeracy development has also been demonstrated in previous studies. In a study of 2,857 children from 141 preschool centres in the United Kingdom, Melhuish et al. (2008) found that home learning activities have a strong association with children’s numeracy skills at school entry. In another study from Canada, children’s mathematical skills in kindergarten and Grades 1 and 2 were shown to be correlated with the frequency in which they were involved in home activities such as cooking, and playing board and
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".