Tracing My Research on Parent Engagement: Working to Interrupt the Story of School as Protectorate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, the author makes visible and works to interrupt the story of school as “protectorate.” In examining, within this dominant narrative, educators' taken-for-granted assumptions about parents' positioning in relation to the landscape of school, the author presents research on parent engagement that provides those within the field of education with a new plotline to replace the protectorate plotline. The author uses the term parent engagement consciously to differentiate it from such notions as parent involvement or parent partnerships that also populate the literature pertaining to educators' relationships with parents and family members of the children they school. In exploring taken-for-granted assumptions, the author defines what parent engagement is, analyzes how notions of parent engagement have been enlarged and expanded over the past decade and a half, and explores how a “curriculum of parents” in teacher education—at preservice, in-service, and graduate levels—could redefine what it means to be a professional by conceptualizing it as being in relationship with and working alongside parents and families.
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 | 0.011 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.034 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.023 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".