MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136519715

Play in the Grade One Classroom: An Exploration of Teacher Beliefs, Classroom Organization, and Obstacles to Implementation in Quebec

2008· article· en· W2136519715 on OpenAlexaffabout
Amanda Quance, Joanne Lehrer, Helen Stathopoulos

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Development and Digital Technology
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationPedagogyPsychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A mixed methods investigation into Grade One teachers’ beliefs and practices about play in the classroom was conducted in a French public school board in Quebec. Forty-three teachers completed questionnaires, while a subset of 10 classrooms were photographed, and open-ended interviews were conducted with 7 teachers. Correlation between beliefs, practices, and experience teaching showed that ‘learning through play’ was positively associated with belief in ‘educational toys and manipulation’ (rs = 0.313, p < 0.05), and greater frequency of teacher self reported play activities (r = 0.524, p < 0.01). Teachers who had more experience teaching Grade One, believed less in ‘learning through play’ (r = -0.341, p < 0.05) and reported using fewer play practices in their classes (r = 0.365, p < 0.05). Total years teaching was also negatively correlated with belief in ‘learning through play’ (r = -0.410, p < 0.01). Photographs revealed minimal variation between classrooms, with some elements of play in half of the classrooms. Interviews revealed that teachers found play to be an effective learning strategy, that they primarily used games as play activities in their classrooms, and that school personnel and personal experience supported their use of play, while lack of time, budget and materials limited the amount of play activities implemented.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.005
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.270
GPT teacher head0.523
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations6
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicChild Development and Digital TechnologyFrench-language works237,207