MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1651474439

Parent classroom involvement and the development of social capital: a reading program in East Vancouver

2009· article· en· W1651474439 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Cherylynn Bassani

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of educational enquiry · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicParental Involvement in Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReading (process)PsychologySocial capitalClass (philosophy)Developmental psychologyCapital (architecture)Social psychologySociologyPolitical scienceSocial science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parents have the potential to play an important role in the development of social capital in their children’s classrooms. Both theoretical and empirical evidence suggest that parents’ classroom participation is directly linked to higher academic achievement and pro-social behaviour in the children. This study examines the influence that the in-class parent reading component of the Partners in Education (PIE) program had on parents and children. By evaluating teacher observations of parents who participated in the PIE program and their children over the 2005/2006 school year, the results of this study support the continued funding of this program (and of similar programs). Teachers reiterated fundamental parent, student and parent-student changes. For many students, the reading program enriched the social capital in their classroom as parents moved from being out-group to in-group classroom members, thereby positively influencing their level of support and also their confidence which, in turn, enabled students to improve their academic achievement and or sociability.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.461
Threshold uncertainty score0.928

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.373
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

Citations16
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of educational enquirySame topicParental Involvement in EducationFrench-language works237,207