External to Hirsch’s corpus. This work was selected by an editorial review for D2; Hirsch did not cite it in the ten books indexed here. Its zero occurrence, book, and load counts are intentional. No corpus occurrence has been inferred or created.
Identity review: Codex multi-agent D2 evidence audit; not human-signed · 2026-08-24
Publisher metadata, abstract, design and reported result sections were checked; the complete paper was not read end to end.
Access checked: full text partially read · 2026-08-24 · open checked access point
Primary paper available; abstract and result sections checked, not read end to end.
Independence category: independent Academic developer-evaluator trial of an integrated science-literacy programme unrelated to CKF. It supplies a mechanism test, not an independent replication of Core Knowledge.
The Impact of an Integrated Approach to Science and Literacy in Elementary School Classrooms · single work
Review authority: Codex multi-agent D2 evidence audit; not human-signed
Cervetti, G. N., Barber, J., Dorph, R., Pearson, P. D., & Goldschmidt, P. G. (2012). The impact of an integrated approach to science and literacy in elementary school classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(5), 631-658.
Randomized classroom field trial used as an independent content-literacy mechanism test.
doi.org/10.1002/tea.21015 · checked record
Review state: full text partially read
Cervetti et al. 2012 Seeds of Science trial · supports A2, qualifies A3, qualifies A7
non ckf developer evaluator mechanism test
primary paper partially read; results sections checked — Publisher identity, abstract, design and primary result sections; not read end to end
developer evaluator non ckf
Developer-evaluator academic programme unrelated to CKF; useful for the general mechanism, not a Core Knowledge replication.
An eight-week integrated programme caused large science-understanding and smaller vocabulary/writing gains in 94 classrooms.
A positive science-reading effect, demographic gap closure or system-wide feasibility.
Open limitation: Science reading comprehension was comparable between conditions; no gap-change estimand was reported.
No occurrence is shown because Hirsch did not cite this work in the ten-book corpus. The dossier appraisal above records why the editorial layer selected it.