MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2053636313 · doi:10.1177/1098214008319012

The Case of Top Beginnings and the Missing Child Outcomes

2008· article· en· W2053636313 on OpenAlexaff
Gary Walker, Anne C. Kubisch, Charles Bruner, Sanjeev Sridharan, Susan Philliber, Greg M. Shaw, Harriet Dichter

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Evaluation · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEarly Childhood Education and Development
Canadian institutionsEducation and Early Childhood Development
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFormative assessmentWork (physics)Set (abstract data type)Foundation (evidence)Program evaluationPolitical sciencePublic relationsPsychologyManagement scienceEngineering ethicsPedagogyPublic administrationEngineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Case of Top Beginnings and the Missing Child Outcomes is a fictionalized case study of a set of evaluation challenges faced in evaluating comprehensive initiatives that are seeking to build systems. In this case, the issue is a multistate foundation-funded early learning system building initiative that has to date primarily employed a case study approach that has provided a formative assessment of progress in building systems. Funders, practitioners, and evaluators all have perspectives on what is needed next to inform future work. In particular, funders want to see evidence of progress and signs that there are impacts on children's development and readiness for school. The case poses fundamental questions in evaluating such complex initiatives that involve public will building and mobilization as well as implementation concerns. The case poses specific issues that need to be answered in moving to a next stage of evaluation.

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)0.004
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 score0.748
Threshold uncertainty score0.635

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.330 · 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of EvaluationSame topicEarly Childhood Education and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207