MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1537291187

Multicultural Education issues, policies, and practices

2001· book· en· W1537291187 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Farideh Salili, Rumjahn Hoosain

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Challenges and Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulticulturalismEthnic groupMulticultural educationImmigrationSociologyAcademic achievementIdentity (music)PopulationGender studiesPedagogyPolitical scienceAnthropologyLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Preface, Acknowledgments, Introduction, Multicultural Education: History, Issues, And Practices, Farideh Salili and Rumjahn Hoosain. Cooperative Learning Programs And Multicultural Education: Improving Intergroup Relations, Robert Cooper and Robert E. Slavin. Understanding The Impact Of Disadvantage On Academic Achievement, Colette Van Laar. Academic Adaptation Of Asian Migrant Of Overseas Students In Australia And Canada, Cynthia Leung. Students As Cultural Beings: Motivation, Learning And Achievement Among Students Of Diverse Ethnic Background, Clarence Chi-hung Ng. Multicultural Education In Latvia, Iveta Silova And Guntars Catlaks. Immigration Policy And Multicultural Education In Australia: Charting The Changes, Bob Hill and Rod Allan. Validation Of Multicultural Personality Questionnaire Among An Internationally Oriented Student Population In Taiwan, Stefan T. Mol, Jan-Pieter van Oudenhoven, and Karen I van der Zee. Education Needs For Cross-cultural Convergence In Family Legal Duties And Reciprocal Responsibilities, Oliver C.S. Tzeng. Literature, A Driving Force In Ethnic Identity And Social Responsibility Development, Nancy Hansen-Kerning and Donald T. Mizokawa.

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)0.004
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.010
Scholarly communication0.0110.006
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations30
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEducational Challenges and InnovationsFrench-language works237,207