MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3164301095 · doi:10.1016/j.ijedro.2021.100052

Protocol: A randomized controlled trial of the Fluency into Comprehension program in primary schools

2021· article· en· W3164301095 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Educational Research Open · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicReading and Literacy Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEconomic and Social Research CouncilQueen's University
KeywordsFluencyProtocol (science)Randomized controlled trialFidelityDisadvantageComprehensionPsychologyReading (process)Reading comprehensionMedical educationComputer scienceMathematics educationMedicineArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the research protocol for a Phase 2 randomized controlled trial of the Fluency into Comprehension program in primary schools. The program is a workforce development program that supports teachers and teaching assistants develop and deliver targeted reading fluency and comprehension instruction to children aged 7–9. The protocol outlines a research design to assess whether the program delivered over approximately 12 weeks improves reading outcomes, in a sample of up to 192 children from 12 schools in four English districts with high socio-economic disadvantage. The outcome measures are two reading standardized tests. A process evaluation will measure fidelity and potential for scale-up.

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.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.137
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.527
Teacher spread0.441 · 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