MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170778098 · doi:10.1177/0016986207302720

School-Within-a-School Gifted Programs

2007· article· en· W2170778098 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

VenueGifted Child Quarterly · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducation, Achievement, and Giftedness
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGifted educationPsychologyMathematics educationSchool climatePedagogyFocus groupMedical educationSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors conduct open-ended surveys of 530 students and teachers in three publicly funded schools with different approaches to providing a high-ability “school-within-a-school”: a gifted program, an international baccalaureate program, and a high-ability program with a science focus. Overall, the authors find that teachers and students in all of these gifted programs express strong satisfaction with their academic programs. At the same time, however, all groups (students and teachers in gifted and regular programs at all three schools) express concerns about the relationship between the special gifted programs and the schools within which they are housed. Based on an analysis of stakeholders' concerns and suggestions in the contexts of the different schools' approaches to integration, suggestions are made for and questions are raised about fostering a positive school climate in secondary schools that offer programming for high-ability learners.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.213
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.004

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.293 · 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