MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W249237961 · doi:10.5206/eei.v21i1.7667

Summer Literacy for Young Vulnerable Learners: A Study of Caregiver Involvement and Program Stability

2011· article· en· W249237961 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Ashley Graham, John K. McNamara, Jackie VanLankveld

Bibliographic record

VenueExceptionality Education International · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicReading and Literacy Development
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLiteracyPsychologyExploratory researchEmergent literacyReading (process)Developmental psychologyMathematics educationAcademic achievementMedical educationPedagogyMedicineSociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Emergent literacy programs for young children are significantly more effective when caregivers are integral components of program delivery. This is particular-ly important when designing programs for vulnerable children such as those with lower academic achievement due to learning and language disabilities, lower so-cioeconomic environments, or learning in a language other than their native language. Including caregivers in program delivery will impact not only the effec-tiveness of the program but also its stability. This exploratory study investigated the efficacy and stability of a summer family literacy program on the reading achievement of 14 four-year-old children completing their pre-kindergarten year. Children were assessed prior to, immediately proceeding, and 6 months following the summer program. The results of the study indicated that children demonstrat-ed significant gains in all aspects of emergent literacy and furthermore, sustained these gains 6 months after the program.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.167
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.310 · 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.

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

Citations4
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExceptionality Education InternationalSame topicReading and Literacy DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207