Promoting vocabulary acquisition among grade one and two ESL students with word explanation and repeated reading using audiotaped books
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the effectiveness of an intervention using word explanation and repeated reading supported by audio taped books, to increase knowledge of targeted vocabulary words. Participants in the study attended an inner city school in a metropolitan Canadian city. A total of 24 grade one and two ESL students with early reading delays participated. Pre-test measures included the PPVT-III (Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test - Third Edition, Dunn & Dunn, 1997) and Memory for Digits subtest (Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing, Wagner, Torgesen & Rashotte, 1999). A 58-item Target Vocabulary "Pest of words selected for study in the intervention was given pre and post-test to all participants. Twelve students were assigned to the intervention of shared reading, word explanation and home practice using audiotaped books. Twelve students in the control condition received their regular language arts program. Repeated measures ANOVA of pre and post-test target vocabulary scores found an overall significant pre-test-post-test effect between intervention and control groups. An interaction between pre-test-post-test and treatment groups was also found, with the intervention group showing a larger post-test score. Variables of grade, book level and parts of speech were examined using repeated measures ANOVA with no significant effects found on target vocabulary gain scores. Pearson correlation between word gains on the Target Vocabulary Test and short term memory scores on the Digit Span subtest (CTOPP) found a positive and near significant correlation for the intervention group. Four case studies of students in the intervention group illustrated a relationship between higher short-term memory scores and larger target vocabulary gains. Results suggest that word explanation and repeated reading combined are effective for increasing vocabulary among grade one and two ESL students. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".