Las Estrategias Didácticas Inclusivas y el Fortalecimiento de la Lectura en Segundo de Primaria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The curricula and programs in Mexico indicate that girls and boys have the first two years of primary education to consolidate the acquisition of reading and writing, however, when they enter second grade they are not able to read and write with total autonomy, mainly in the cognitive process of reading fluency. For this reason, it is considered necessary to design inclusive didactic strategies that strengthen reading by guaranteeing the process of attention to diversity. The general objective of this work was to present a proposal for inclusive didactic strategies that strengthen reading in students who are in the second grade of primary education "Álvaro Aguilar Curmina" during the second quarter of the 2023-2024 school year. The focus of this work is qualitative, a type of participatory action research, the sample population is made up of 30 students who are in the second grade of primary education. The instruments used to collect data were checklists and observation guides. The end results were that language development, literacy, and phonological awareness were improved, and therefore, reading and reading fluency were not limited to coding or literal reproduction, but to a process of interpretation and construction of meanings.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".