MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067644053 · doi:10.1177/1365480210378942

Implementing children’s human rights education in schools

2010· article· en· W2067644053 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueImproving Schools · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChildren's Rights and Participation
Canadian institutionsCape Breton University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEthosPromotion (chess)CurriculumHuman rightsHuman rights educationPedagogyPolitical scienceBest practiceSociologyPublic relationsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Evaluations of a children’s rights education initiative in schools in Hampshire, England — consistent with previous research findings — demonstrate the effectiveness of a framework of rights for school policy, practice, and teaching, for promoting rights-respecting attitudes and behaviors among children, and for improving the school ethos. The value of rights-consistent schooling is seen not only in its contemporaneous benefits on children, but also in its capacity to have a long-term effect on the promotion and maintenance of a rights-supporting culture. To this end, we provide data on how Hampshire educators were able to successfully implement their program. We examine schools that were very successful in incorporating children’s rights across the curriculum and throughout all school policies and practices, and compare their implementation efforts and experiences with schools that were less successful. By identifying the key variables that differentiate success, we aim to facilitate the implementation of rights-consistent schooling.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.186
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.329 · 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