Feedback from Participants and Leaders in an Intervention Program: The 1997–1998 Opening Doors Process Evaluation
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
Parents, students, and program leaders involved in an in-school drug prevention program called Opening Doors were assessed for their perceptions of the efficacy of the program. In general, the feedback indicated a very high program satisfaction level from respondents with parents indicating the highest level satisfaction (92%). Areas for improvement ranged from: parent attendance, invitation process, increased support from schools, and increasing awareness of scheduling and time involvement by leaders and school administration based on program leader feedback as well as invitation process and program duration from the parents (e.g., 37% thought the program was too short). Student satisfaction may be predicted from the perceived impact of the program on significant relationships (e.g., with peers and family) as well as affective reactions to the program (e.g., enjoyment of the program). Finally, a school-level analysis indicated that the application of the Opening Doors Program in different schools was provided uniformly.
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 | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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