MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416955938 · doi:10.1080/2331186x.2025.2597056

Supporting kindergarteners’ learning of mathematics through the interactive reading of mathematical stories

2025· article· en· W4416955938 on OpenAlexaff
Maryam Almulhim

Bibliographic record

VenueCogent Education · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills
Canadian institutionsEducation and Early Childhood Development
FundersKing Faisal University
KeywordsReading (process)Class (philosophy)Interactive LearningInteractive mediaQualitative researchTeaching methodGrounded theory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reading mathematical stories in interactive reading sessions creates ideal settings for social interactions, and this can significantly improve their efficacy as pedagogical tools. This small-scale teaching experiment aimed to investigate the role of interactive reading in promoting mathematical understanding through story-based learning. It focuses on the mathematical learning outcomes that can be achieved through the interactive reading of mathematical stories. A kindergarten teacher delivered a mathematical story to her class of twenty-three children, aged five to seven. The story targeted knowledge of the comparative magnitude of numbers and was delivered in an interactive reading setting. A qualitative analysis of the video recording indicated that the interactive reading played a significant role in promoting the children’s mathematical understanding. While there were certain negative outcomes, their occurrence rates were significantly lower than the positive outcomes. Overall, the implementation of interactive strategies, where the children were encouraged to demonstrate their existing and developing comprehension, and subsequently received affirmation of that understanding, resulted in mainly positive outcomes. An important implication of this study is that incorporating interactive readings of mathematical stories into early childhood classrooms can enhance children’s mathematical understanding, enrich teacher–child interactions, and inform policymakers in the design of more effective reading practices.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.341 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCogent EducationSame topicCognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skillsFrench-language works237,207