Primary School Students' Attitudes towards Reading
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to examine the level of primary school students' attitudes towards reading and whether they differ according to various variables. Descriptive scanning model was used in the research. The universe of the research consists of primary school students studying in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th grades in Istanbul. The sample of the study consists of 534 primary school students who study in 2, 3 and 4 classes in primary schools in Avcılar and Beylikdüzü districts of Istanbul. In the research, “Personal Information Form” and “Reading Attitude Scale” were used as data collection tools. SPSS was used in the analysis of the data. As a result of data analysis, it was observed that primary school students' attitudes towards reading were high. The attitudes of primary school students towards reading show a statistically significant difference in the total scores, in the reading for fun and in the academic reading sub-dimensions according to variables of gender, book-magazine reading status and state of enjoying the gift of books. The attitudes of female students, those who read books and magazines, and those who like to give books to them are higher. The attitudes of primary school students towards reading show a statistically significant difference according to the variable of buying book magazines to read in the sub-dimension of reading for entertainment and in the total scores. This difference is in favor of those who buy book and magazines to read. The attitudes of primary school students towards reading show a statistically significant difference in sub-dimension of reading for entertainment purposes according to the number of siblings. The attitudes of primary school students towards reading show a statistically significant difference in the total scores, in the reading for fun and in the academic reading sub-dimensions according to the variables of the class she studied and the number of books read per week. Primary school students' attitudes towards reading do not show a statistically significant difference according to variables.of mother and father educational status and favorite book type.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".