MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2995345579 · doi:10.5539/ijel.v10n1p101

A Study on the Factors Affecting Reading and Reading Habits of Preschool Children

2019· article· en· W2995345579 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bünyamin Celik

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of English Linguistics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicReading and Literacy Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHabitReading (process)PsychologyScope (computer science)Developmental psychologyMathematics educationPeriod (music)Social psychologyComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the developing world, reading habit, which is one of the first habits of traditional education, continues primarily in the family and then in kindergartens. In this research, factors such as family, environment, kindergarten and libraries are discussed in terms of acquiring reading habit in preschool period and evaluations are made about the effects of these factors on reading habit. In this study, the results of the research on the factors in the reading habit of Ishık Kindergarten students of Ronaki Hawler Education Company in Erbil, Iraq are included. Within the scope of the research, one-on-one interviews were conducted with 106 children in the six-year age group who were closest to starting primary school among the kindergarten students and 20 kindergarten teachers and a questionnaire was conducted. In this process, the kindergarten was observed. Then, the data obtained from the questionnaires were analyzed in SPSS program. In addition, structured interviews provided information about activities that aimed at acquiring reading habits of kindergarten teachers. In the conclusion part of the study, the data obtained were evaluated in terms of the factors that enable children to acquire reading habits. The results of the study showed that families have a guiding role in having the children acquire the reading habit. In addition, it was concluded that the group of friends, the environment, various books and genres, kindergarten education and libraries were other important elements in this preparation period.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations34
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of English LinguisticsSame topicReading and Literacy DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207