MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150370757 · doi:10.3102/0013189x09332373

The ISI Classroom Observation System: Examining the Literacy Instruction Provided to Individual Students

2009· article· en· W2150370757 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

VenueEducational Researcher · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEarly Childhood Education and Development
Canadian institutionsEducation and Early Childhood Development
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConceptualizationPsychologyMathematics educationLiteracyCoding (social sciences)Context (archaeology)Teaching methodLearning environmentClassroom managementAcademic achievementPedagogyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Individualizing Student Instruction (ISI) classroom observation and coding system is designed to provide a detailed picture of the classroom environment at the level of the individual student. Using a multidimensional conceptualization of the classroom environment, foundational elements (teacher warmth and responsiveness to students, classroom management) and instructional elements (teacher-child interactions, context, and content) are described. The authors have used the ISI system to document that children who share the same classroom have very different learning opportunities, that instruction occurs through interactions among teachers and students, and that the effect of this instruction depends on children’s language and literacy skills. This means that what is effective for one child may be ineffective for another with different skills. With improving classroom observation systems, the dynamics of the complex classroom environment as it affects student learning can be better understood.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.567
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.327 · 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