MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2107328512 · doi:10.1044/lle11.2.2

Clinical Issues: Dynamic Assessment of Children From Culturally Diverse Backgrounds

2004· article· en· W2107328512 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ronald B. Gillam, Elizabeth D. Penña

Bibliographic record

VenuePerspectives on Language Learning and Education · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational and Psychological Assessments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeDynamic assessmentMillerPsychologyLinguisticsStyle (visual arts)MulticulturalismPedagogyDevelopmental psychologyHistoryPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

No AccessPerspectives on Language Learning and EducationClinical Issues1 Jul 2004Clinical Issues: Dynamic Assessment of Children From Culturally Diverse Backgrounds Ronald B. Gillam and Elizabeth D. Penña Ronald B. Gillam University of Texas at Austin Google Scholar More articles by this author and Elizabeth D. Penña University of Texas at Austin Google Scholar More articles by this author https://doi.org/10.1044/lle11.2.2 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationTrack Citations ShareFacebookTwitterLinked In References Berman, R. A., & Slobin, D. I. (1994). Relating events in narrative: A crosslinguistic developmental study. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Google Scholar Botting, N. (2002). Narrative as a tool for the assessment of linguistic and pragmatic impairments.Child Language Teaching & Therapy, 18(1), 1– 22. Google Scholar Gillam, R., & McFadden, T. U. (1994). Redefining assessment as a holistic discovery process.Journal of Childhood Communication Disorders, 16(1), 36–40. CrossrefGoogle Scholar Gillam, R. B., Peña, E. D., & Miller, L. (1999). Dynamic assessment of narrative and expository discourse.Topics in Language Disorders, 20(1), 33–47. CrossrefGoogle Scholar Gutierrez-Clellen, V. F., & Pena, E. (2001). Dynamic assessment of diverse children: A tutorial.Language, Speech & Hearing Services in the Schools, 32(4), 212–224. Google Scholar Gutierrez-Clellen, V. F., Pena, E., & Quinn, R. (1995). Accommodating cultural differences in narrative style: A multicultural perspective.Topics in Language Disorders, 15(4), 54–67. CrossrefGoogle Scholar Gutierrez-Clellen, V. F., & Quinn, R. (1993). Assessing narratives in diverse cultural/linguistic populations: Clinical implications.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 24(1), 2–9. LinkGoogle Scholar Iglesias, A. (1985). Cultural conflict in the classroom: The communicatively different child.In D. N. Ripich & F. M. Spinelli (Eds.), School discourse problems (pp. 79–96). San Diego: College-Hill. Google Scholar Iglesias, A., & Gutierrez-Clellen, V. (1988). Thecultural linguistic minority student.In D. Yoder & R. Kent (Eds.), Decision making in speech-language pathology (pp. 119–120). Burlington, Canada: B. C. Decker. Google Scholar McCabe, A. (1997). Developmental and cross-cultural aspects of children’s narration. In P. Michael & G. W. Bamberg (Eds.), Narrative Development: Six approaches (pp. 137–174). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Google Scholar Miller, L. (2000a). Birdandhis ring. Austin, TX: Neon Rose Productions. Google Scholar Miller, L. (2000b). Two friends. Austin, TX: Neon Rose Productions. Google Scholar Miller, L., Gillam, R., & Peña, E. (2001). Dynamic assessment and intervention: Improving children’s narrative skills. Austin, TX: PRO-ED. Google Scholar Peña, E. D., & Gillam, R. B. (2000). Dynamic assessment of children referred for speech and language evaluations.In C. Lidz & J. Elliott (Eds.), Dynamic assessment: Prevailing models and applications (vol. 6, pp. 543–575). Oxford: Elsevier Science. Google Scholar Peña, E., Iglesias, A., & Lidz, C. (2001). Reducing test bias through dynamic assessment of children’s word learning ability.American Journal of Speech Language Pathology, 10, 138–154. LinkGoogle Scholar Spinillo, A. G., & Pinto, G. (1994). Children’s narratives under different conditions: A comparative study.British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 12(2), 177–193. Google Scholar Ukrainetz, T. A., Harpell, S., Walsh, C., & Coyle, C. (2000). A preliminary investigation of dynamic assessment with Native American kin-dergartners.Language, Speech & Hearing Services in the Schools, 31(2), 142–154. ASHAWireGoogle Scholar Additional Resources FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited ByPerspectives on School-Based Issues11:3 (80-87)1 Oct 2010Dynamic Assessment: Whys and HowsLynette Austin Volume 11Issue 2July 2004Pages: 2-5 Get Permissions Add to your Mendeley library History Published in issue: Jul 1, 2004 Metrics Downloaded 40 times Topicsasha-topicsasha-article-typesasha-sigsCopyright & Permissions© 2004 American Speech-Language-Hearing AssociationPDF DownloadLoading ...

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.435 · 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.

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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePerspectives on Language Learning and EducationSame topicEducational and Psychological AssessmentsFrench-language works237,207