Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 2,872

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Justice and the Politics of Difference

·2011·Princeton University Press eBooks

Abstract

Educators frequently recommend that children read aloud to parents at home in the belief that the activity will positively contribute to children's literacy growth.From a research perspective, however, little is known about these at-home reading experiences.Using a social constructivist theoretical perspective, the present study investigated the relationships between children's reading ability, children's sex, mothers' educational level, and mothers' helping behaviors during children's at-home oral reading practice.Seventy-six mother-child pairs from a suburban, middle-class community participated in the project.Accelerated and at-risk third grade readers took home a tape recorder and a third grade science text to read aloud to mothers.The conversations were audiotaped, professionally transcribed, and then coded.Results of the study indicated that the conversations between at-risk readers and their mothers were marked by the frequent use of error correction interventions, while the conversations between accelerated readers and their mothers were marked by children's extensive verbal involvement.A pattern of richer language interaction was also seen in the conversations of mothers and daughters when compared to those of mothers and sons.High school educated mothers used significantly more error correction interventions than did college educated mothers despite the fact that there were equal numbers of accelerated and at-risk readers in each of the educational groups.Additionally, college educated mothers asked significantly more high level questions than did high school educated mothers.Implications for practice are discussed.(Contains 58 references and 5 figures of data; appendixes contain the coding scheme and guidelines for using the scheme.)

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/j.ctvcm4g4q

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 2,872

Metadata

Venue
Princeton University Press eBooks
Published
2011-08-22
OpenAlex
W2228762060
Cited by
2,872
References
1
FWCI
78.81
Type
book
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Justice and the Politics of Difference. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/j.ctvcm4g4q
The paper
Justice and the Politics of Difference. (2011). Princeton University Press eBooks. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvcm4g4q

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.