Unpacking the Effects of Parents on Their Children’s Emergent Literacy Skills and Word Reading: Evidence from Urban and Rural Settings in China
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose We examined the role of distal (parents’ education, family’s income, parents’ expectations, and parents’ attitudes to the home teaching of literacy) and proximal (formal and informal home literacy environment, access to literacy resources, and extracurricular activities) parental factors in children’s early literacy skills and whether the relations vary across affluent and disadvantaged societies in China.Method Five hundred fifty-three third-year kindergarten Chinese children (Mage = 74.59 months) were recruited from Jining, Luqiao, and Mapo and were assessed on measures of phonological awareness, vocabulary, pinyin knowledge, and word reading. Their parents filled out a questionnaire on their education and income as well as on the frequency of engaging in different home literacy activities, their expectations and attitudes to the home teaching of literacy, and their children’s extracurricular activities.Results Results of multigroup analyses and mediation analyses revealed both direct and indirect effects of both distal and proximal parental factors on emergent literacy skills and word reading. In addition, the models were strikingly similar across the two settings.Conclusion The findings suggest that the pathways of differential influences from parental factors to children’s early literacy skills may be similar across socioeconomic contexts.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it