MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3034921791 · doi:10.5539/jedp.v10n2p25

Effects of Higher Order Questioning in Prekindergarten for School Readiness

2020· article· en· W3034921791 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tiffany Papa

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Educational and Developmental Psychology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Critical Thinking Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologySocioeconomic statusMathematics educationDevelopmental psychologyPreschool educationTest (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated whether the strategy of higher order questioning during interest area time would have a positive effect on kindergarten school readiness (specifically focusing on mathematical and language concepts) for students in a low-socioeconomic area school. Evidence from the Developmental Indicators for the Assessment of Learning/ Third Edition (DIAL-3) scores (completed upon entering kindergarten) establishes that the students in this low-socioeconomic area school were not kindergarten ready. Statistical analyses concurred that increasing the frequency of higher order questioning during interest area time significantly improves the test performance of students within the mathematical and language concepts area of the DIAL-3 assessment. The student achievement results of providing teacher training in higher-order questioning techniques during interest area time (the most vital learning time of the prekindergarten day) has provided evidence of increased cognitive development, ultimately increasing student achievement in mathematical and language skills. High-quality prekindergarten services involving best practices are the precursors for kindergarten; therefore, improving teacher-child verbal interactions in prekindergarten ultimately addresses the issue of kindergarten school readiness. Additional findings included a correlation indicating that the students who did well in Language skills also did well in Mathematics and a statistically significant correlation existed between better scores and positive behavior. It is anticipated that the contributions of the present study will encourage future research that will continue to elaborate upon the effects of higher order questioning at the prekindergarten level on kindergarten school readiness.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.348
Threshold uncertainty score0.589

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.356 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Educational and Developmental PsychologySame topicEducation and Critical Thinking DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207