Classroom and School Factors Affecting Mathematics Achievement: A Comparative Study of Australia and the United States Using TIMSS
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent work on differences in mathematics achievement has highlighted the importance of classroom, teacher and school factors. The present study used data from the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) to look at student, classroom and school factors influencing mathematics achievement in Australia and the United States (US). It found that classroom differences account for about one-third of the variation in student achievement in the US and over one-quarter in Australia. Most of the classroom variation in both countries was due to compositional and organisational factors, very little of it due to differences between teachers. This has important implications for policy regarding the improvement of mathematics achievement. It suggests that school systems may gain little by targeting teachers only, and need to give consideration to the role of pupil grouping practices and the effects of tracking and streaming on classroom learning environments.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it