MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028312598 · doi:10.1515/mlt-2012-0008

Perceived Cultural Responsiveness and Effectiveness of a Speech and Language Program for Indigenous Preschool Students

2013· article· en· W2028312598 on OpenAlexaff
Kent McIntosh, Calli B. Craft, Leslie D. MacKay

Bibliographic record

VenueMulticultural Learning and Teaching · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEarly Childhood Education and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumIndigenousLikert scalePsychologyCulturally appropriateIntervention (counseling)Cultural competenceMedical educationCultural diversityPerceptionLanguage proficiencyProgram evaluationIndigenous languagePedagogyDevelopmental psychologyMedicineSociologyGerontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Despite an increasing need for culturally relevant curricula, what is considered culturally responsive and how it is assessed is under-researched. The present study examined the perceived cultural responsiveness and effectiveness of an early intervention program designed to teach early language skills and expose students to Indigenous culture, the Moe the Mouse ® Speech, and Language Development Program. Educator’s perceptions of the program were assessed through a Likert-type survey provided to implementers across British Columbia. The survey was completed by 58 respondents using the program. Results indicated that the respondents perceived the program to be culturally responsive, and their perceptions of cultural responsiveness were significantly related to ratings of effectiveness, use, and social validity. Responsiveness was not rated as highly by respondents in a different geographic region than where the program was developed. Finally, effectiveness in improving speech and language skills was rated higher when educators integrated the program into the regular curriculum or incorporated Native language instruction. Implications for research and practice are reviewed.

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 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)0.001
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 score0.506
Threshold uncertainty score0.727

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMulticultural Learning and TeachingSame topicEarly Childhood Education and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207