Influence of Regular Visual Thinking Strategies Activities on Sustained Attention Abilities of Quebec Primary School Students: A Developmental Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Visual Thinking Strategies (VTS) are an art appreciation method known to improve students’ quality of attention and sense of observation. Although great importance is attached to attentional skills, few studies attempt to measure and verify interventions that improve development of attentional processes in school aged children. Objective: Using a small-scale quantitative approach, verify the potential development of sustained attention of Quebec (Canada) primary school students following VTS practice spread over one school year. Participants: 125 primary school students (fourth and fifth graders/7 to 9 years old). Intervention: Experiments were conducted in five classrooms at two primary schools including control groups. Measurements: Kids Test for Attentional Performance (KiTAP) was used repeatedly throughout the school year on two sub-groups of 49 randomly selected participants. Results: KiTAP results showed statistically significant differences for sustained attention development of pretest/post-test participants having received VTS lessons. Conclusion: Regular VTS practice favours the maturation of sustained attention in primary school students.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".