MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111598638 · doi:10.20355/c58c77

Keeping Kids in School: A Study Examining the Long-Term Impact of Afterschool Enrichment Programs on Students’ High School Dropout Rates

2011· article· en· W2111598638 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Denise Huang, Kyung Sung Kim, Jamie Cho, Anne Marshall, Patricia Pérez

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Contemporary Issues in Education · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth Development and Social Support
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDropout (neural networks)Term (time)Random assignmentPsychologySchool dropoutSample (material)Medical educationMathematics educationMedicineComputer scienceSocioeconomicsSociologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the potential benefits of afterschool programs, much of the related research has been limited to an examination of only their immediate or short-term effects. The LA’s BEST afterschool program has been in operation for more than 20 years, providing researchers with a unique opportunity to explore the long-term effects of afterschool programming. This study examined the dropout rates of the LA’s BEST afterschool participants and compared them to a stratified random district sample that was matched to the characteristics of the afterschool students. The results indicated that students who had participated in the afterschool program for at least three years showed a significantly lower dropout rate than the district students overall.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.335 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations8
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Contemporary Issues in EducationSame topicYouth Development and Social SupportFrench-language works237,207