Morphological awareness and word-level reading in early and middle elementary school years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We examined whether morphological awareness made a significant contribution to word-level reading across Grades 1 to 4. We test these relations specifically in a task measuring awareness of past-tense forms. A total of 375 children from Grades 1 to 4 completed tasks assessing past-tense morphological awareness along with real word and pseudoword reading. Children also completed control measures assessing phonological awareness, phonological short-term memory, sentence-level language skills, and nonverbal cognitive ability. After these controls, past-tense morphological awareness was a significant predictor of real word reading in Grades 1 and 2, but not in Grades 3 and 4. Further, following on all controls, past-tense morphological awareness was a consistent predictor of pseudoword reading across Grades 1 to 4. Morphological awareness, at least as measured with past-tense verbs, appears to have a role in word reading across the early to middle elementary school grades; for young readers, there are relations to reading of both known and novel words, and for older readers, relations are significant specifically in reading novel words. These findings are discussed within the context of theories of word reading development.
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 | 0.000 | 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".