An examination of prosodic awareness and reading achievement across Grades 3 to 6: A focus on English Monolinguals and Chinese-English Bilingual Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation comprises two studies that examine predictors of children’s reading. In Study 1, I investigated the unique contributions of prosodic awareness and morphological awareness to word reading and reading comprehension in English-only children (n=110) across Grades 4 and 5. Prosodic awareness and morphological awareness were unique predictors of word reading, and morphological awareness was the only predictor of word reading that also explained individual differences in reading comprehension. The relationship between prosodic awareness and word reading was partially mediated by phonemic awareness and morphological awareness, and the relationship between prosodic awareness and reading comprehension was fully mediated by morphological awareness and word reading. In Study 2, I examined prosodic awareness and morphological awareness among a comprehensive set of predictors in English-only (n=90) and Chinese-English bilingual (n=128) children between Grades 3 to 6. I provide evidence illustrating that prosody represents a separate dimension of phonology. Prosody explained unique variance in word reading after accounting for segmental phonological awareness in both language groups, but these effects did not remain after accounting for morphological awareness and orthographic awareness in the model. The path analyses revealed indirect effects of prosody on word reading through morphological awareness in the English-only group, and indirect effects of prosody on word reading through morphological awareness and segmental phonology in the Chinese-English bilingual group. To conclude, prosody was a contributor to word reading processes, and morphology had unique effects on word reading and reading comprehension processes. Prosody represents a broad construct, which I have focused my examination on word-level prosodic awareness in relation to reading outcomes. Across the three samples of children across Grades 3 to 6, prosody was a significant correlate with reading outcomes and established predictors including vocabulary, segmental phonological awareness, and morphological awareness. I extended this investigation of prosody to a second language group and provided insight into the relative contributions of these predictors within a comprehensive and complex model of word reading. To conclude, prosody may play a supportive role in the reading network, but it is a distinct construct that should be considered seriously in theoretical models of reading.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".