Early writing development in L1 English speaking children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper reports on the developmental and psychometric properties of an early writing task. The study was carried out over four years in Toronto, Canada with L1 English-speaking children. Two cohorts of children who began in Nursery School were followed to the end of their Grade 1 year. Children were administered the same writing task at four time points along with standardized measures of early reading. The early writing task required children to write words and number and word combinations; we examined how children move from understanding print as “objects” to understanding print as representation of sounds. We also examined how writing in Nursery School and Kindergarten related to later literacy skills. The methodology allowed us to examine the extent to which early writing in Nursery School (3 years old) and Junior Kindergarten (4 years old) predicted later literacy skills when children were in Grade 1 (6 years old) and were receiving formal reading instruction. Results show characteristic features of children’s early writing of number and word combinations at each of the four grade levels and show that performance on the writing task in Kindergarten predicted reading skills at the end of Grade 1.
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".