MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405004330 · doi:10.1080/00220671.2024.2436879

Teachers’ and kindergartners’ perceptions of children’s participation in interactive book reading

2024· article· en· W4405004330 on OpenAlexaff
Paméla McMahon‐Morin, Marie-Pier Gingras, Marie‐Christine Hallé, Ingrid Verduyckt

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Educational Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Development and Digital Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresUniversité de MontréalCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReading (process)PerceptionPsychologyEarly childhood educationPicture booksDevelopmental psychologyMathematics educationPedagogyVisual artsArtLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Children learn language through participating in language-rich activities such as book reading. This longitudinal qualitative study explored the perception of 11 teachers and 78 kindergartners regarding children’s participation in book-reading in order to understand how it is experienced by those most involved in this activity. Each participant was interviewed three times, before, after and 3-month after a professional development program on interactive book reading. The reflexive thematic analysis yielded four themes describing: 1) the shift from a more adult-controlled to a more spontaneous child participation; 2) the challenges teachers faced in facilitating children’s participation while maintaining the rhythm of the story; 3) the evolution of children’s perceptions of their role in reading; and 4) children’s perceptions of the relationship between their behavior and their right to participate. The findings have implications for supporting collaboration between teachers and school-based speech-language pathologists to facilitate the implementation of language-supportive practices in the classroom.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.482
Teacher spread0.399 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Educational ResearchSame topicChild Development and Digital TechnologyFrench-language works237,207