MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4308277734 · doi:10.31234/osf.io/w23hs

Early cognitive predictors of language, reading, and mathematics outcomes in the primary grades

2022· preprint· en· W4308277734 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Theresa Pham, Marc F. Joanisse, Daniel Ansari, Janis Oram Cardy, Christine L. Stager, Lisa M. D. Archibald

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicReading and Literacy Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNumeracyReading (process)LiteracyCognitionMathematics educationPsychologyCognitive skillAcademic skillsDevelopmental psychologyPedagogyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Early predictors of language, reading, and mathematics are typically examined independently of each other. This study investigated how early cognitive predictors across domains could predict future academic skills across domains using data from 563 students in kindergarten to second grade (ages 5 to 8; 388 males; largely monolingual English). The roles of language, literacy, and numeracy measured as predictors of later academic grades were examined. Results found that academic domains did not always differentiate as expected. Further, kindergarten language and literacy skills were independent predictors of academic outcomes in grade one. By grade two, early language continued to predict language grades, whereas literacy skills predicted mathematics. Results are discussed in light of the overlapping relationships between language, reading, and mathematics.

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)0.005
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.305 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReading and Literacy Development→French-language works237,207→