Theoretical orientations to reading and instructional practices of eleven grade five teachers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explores the nature of teachers' understandings of theoretical orientation to reading and the relationships between theoretical orientations to reading and instructional practice. The participants were eleven Grade Five classroom teachers, seven female and four male, in one particular school board in Southern Ontario. A series of three in-depth, phenomenological interviews were conducted with each teacher-participant. Utilizing the concept of theoretical orientation to reading, understandings of and relationships between, theoretical orientation to reading and instructional practice were identified and described by the teachers in this study, from an 'emic' (insider) perspective. The themes of teachers' knowledge and beliefs, personal experiences, and constructivist approaches to teaching and learning emerged as highly influential in determining the kinds of instructional decisions made by the teacher participants. The data illustrate how teachers with a skills orientation to reading instruction supported a focus on explicit skills instruction within balanced, eclectic approaches to reading instruction. The results provide a multi-voice construction, showing how the teacher participants' knowledge, beliefs, personal and professional experiences were reflected not only in their efforts to articulate understandings of theoretical orientations to reading, but also in the characteristics of relationships between their theoretical orientation to reading and instructional practices. Patterns and themes in the data also indicate the need for improved pre-service teacher education, and relevant in-service professional development, to better meet the needs of contemporary teachers of reading at the junior division level.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".