MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140823048 · doi:10.1080/00220671.2012.736433

Grade 12 Versus Grade 13: Benefits of an Extra Year of High School

2013· article· en· W2140823048 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Educational Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Research Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedical educationPsychologyMathematics educationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT With more students pursuing university, it becomes essential for high schools to provide training that maximizes their graduates’ success. There is debate over whether an extra year of high school better prepares students for university. The authors used a nationally representative survey to contrast academic and employment outcomes between high school graduates of Grade 12 and Grade 13. Results suggest that Grade 13 graduates obtain higher grades in high school, are more likely to pursue university, and are less likely to be employed full time compared with Grade 12 graduates. Among students enrolled in university, Grade 13 graduates report higher grades in university and satisfaction with their program and do not transfer out of their programs compared to Grade 12 graduates. These findings highlight the importance of an additional year of high school to produce better prepared and more satisfied graduates.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.834
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.199
GPT teacher head0.497
Teacher spread0.298 · 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