Circles of Influence: The Role of School-Community Partnerships in the Character Formation and Citizenship of Secondary School Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Partnerships between schools, families, and communities provide a support net for each student and play a role in promoting academic success (Epstein, 1995; Shapiro, Ginsberg, & Brown, 2002) and moral development. This article is based on a qualitative study of a secondary school with numerous partnerships selected from a southern Ontario school board characterized by economic and cultural diversity. Drawing on the analysis of archival data, observations, and 19 interviews with the educators and community partners at one of the schools, it was found that the study participants shared an understanding of education as the joint responsibility of the school and the community. This article discusses the partnership practices and in so doing, the roles of community partners in encouraging moral development by supporting students academically, emotionally, and socially. When community partners provided learning opportunities and resources not available in the school, the students enhanced their skill sets and were exposed to diverse community values. Through partnership activities, civic responsibility was promoted, and students’ social capital was strengthened as they established their own links with the community in which they lived.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".