MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029422827 · doi:10.1177/10538151010240030101

General Growth Outcomes for Young Children: Developing a Foundation for Continuous Progress Measurement

2001· article· en· W2029422827 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

VenueJournal of Early Intervention · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEarly Childhood Education and Development
Canadian institutionsEducation and Early Childhood Development
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccountabilityPsychologyEarly childhood educationSet (abstract data type)Foundation (evidence)Developmental psychologyChild developmentDevelopmentally Appropriate PracticeEarly childhoodMedical educationMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Public expectations of accountability in our education system have increasingly focused on young children's development, in part because of Goal 1 of the National Education Goals (By the year 2000, all children in America will start school ready to learn). Few sensitive measurement systems have been developed, however, to monitor young children's growth over time. Building such a system requires a parsimonious but comprehensive set of developmental outcomes expected of children between birth and age 8. In the two studies presented here, investigators formulated a set of 15 general growth outcomes for young children, and conducted a survey of parents of children with and without disabilities and professionals in early childhood and early elementary education to validate the outcomes.

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)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.358

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.306 · 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