The Most Effective Kinds of Parents on Children’s Academic Achievement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One of the most important determinant aspects of children’s outcome is parenting. The baby who is born doesn’t have any knowledge about the world so the family can be considered as a first teacher.The objective of this research was to determine the relationship between Baumrind’s three perceived paternal and maternal parenting styles (authoritative, authoritarian & permissive) with academic achievement among Iranian high school students who were between the ages 15 to 17. The total numbers of participants were 546 who included 249 males and 297 females. Participants were selected using proportional stratified and multi-stage cluster random sampling. They filled two questioners, Parental Authority Questionnaire (PAQ) developed by Buri (1991), and self-demographic report which included their current Grade Point Average. In this study academic achievement was dependent variable and subscales of parenting style were independents ones. A noteworthy positive relationship between authoritative parents with academic achievements was shown by Pearson’s correlation. Authoritative parents were determined as the best predicator for dependent variables by standard multiple regression. In contrast, based on students’ academic achievement, the approximate mean score of the three paternal and maternal parenting styles were similar. By considering students’ academic achievement, an independent t-test expressed no differences between male and female students. There are several implications for the Ministry of Education, Administrators of schools, and Parents, which are discussed at various levels.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".