MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148738968 · doi:10.26522/brocked.v20i2.167

Chinese Immigrant Parents’ Involvement in their Children’s School Education: High Interest but Low Action

2011· article· en· W2148738968 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueBrock Education Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicParental Involvement in Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationPsychologyQualitative researchChinese cultureAction (physics)School educationDevelopmental psychologyPedagogySociologyChina

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using interview as the primary data collection method, this qualitative study examined how Chinese immigrant parents are involved in their children’s school education and what factors shape the formats of their involvement. Twelve Chinese immigrant families participated in this study. Data analysis reveals that Chinese parents got involved in their children’s school education regardless of personal experiences. They expressed beliefs that parental involvement is beneficial to both the school and children. However, generally speaking, participants did not go to their children’s school without teachers’ invitation. Language barrier, lack of time and energy, and unfamiliarity with the Canadian school culture were stated as the main reasons that contributed to participants’ limited involvement in school activities. Particularly, new immigrants often feel intimidated to talk to teachers since they do not know what they can say and what not given their unfamiliarity with the Canadian school culture.

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)0.000
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 score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.281 · 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