MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1483547712

The Impact of Teacher-Student Relationships and Achievement Motivation on Students' Intentions to Dropout According to Socio-Economic Status.

2011· article· en· W1483547712 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Julie Bergeron, Roch Chouinard, Michel Janosz

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducation, Achievement, and Giftedness
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDropout (neural networks)PsychologyModerationSocioeconomic statusCompetence (human resources)PhenomenonMultilevel modelHomogeneousSocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologySchool dropoutDemographyPopulationDemographic economicsStatistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main goal was to test if teacher-student relationships and achievement motivation are predicting dropout intention equally for low and high socio-economic status students. A questionnaire measuring teacher-student relationships and achievement motivation was administered to 2,360 French Canadian secondary students between 12 and 15 years old during the spring of 2005. A hierarchical multiple regressions model with interactions predicted their dropout intention. The moderator variable was SES (socio-economic status). Results showed that most predictors of dropout intention acted similarly for both SES. However, strong competence beliefs in mathematics predicted low dropout intention for students from high SES. Knowing that low SES students dropout more than others, our homogeneous predictors do not explain entirely the dropout phenomenon.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.127
Threshold uncertainty score0.252

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.094
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.316 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEducation, Achievement, and GiftednessFrench-language works237,207