MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990422590 · doi:10.1177/004005991104400102

Developing a Classroom Management Plan Using a Tiered Approach

2011· article· en· W1990422590 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTeaching Exceptional Children · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Environments and Student Outcomes
Canadian institutionsEducation and Early Childhood Development
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClassroom managementPlan (archaeology)PsychologySpecial educationWork (physics)Class (philosophy)Individualized Education ProgramMathematics educationGroup workPedagogyBehavior managementGeneral educationMedical educationDevelopmental psychologyComputer scienceEngineeringMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Randi, a special education teacher, has worked in an inclusive sixth grade classroom with Colleen, a general education teacher, since August. Although the class has been running fairly smoothly, it is September and some behavior issues have arisen. Transitions between lessons have been taking longer, general noise level during group work is up, and students have been teasing peers or making negative comments during group discussions. In addition, a small group of students is not completing assignments on time. The two students who have individualized education program (IEP) goals directly related to behavior are also experiencing difficulties. One student has shut down and refuses to do work, and the other student has been getting into fights during lunch break. Although Colleen and Randi had rules and consequences in place at the start of the year, they have decided they need to develop a comprehensive classroom management plan.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.520
Threshold uncertainty score0.724

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.217 · 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