Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using methods derived from post occupancy evaluation and ethnography, the visual and physical environmental characteristics of eighteen daycare centres were studied and inventorized. The attitudes, perceptions and ideologies of the directors and staffs to these learning environments and arts activities were also ascertained. The centres were located in Edmonton, Alberta, and both private and public centres were studied. The children attending these centres came from diverse cultural and economic backgrounds. The characteristics were recorded in an informal manner, through field notes, photographs and a pre-coded checklist which rated the quality of the items. From this, three subcategories of quality were derived; standard, below standard and above standard. The descriptive data indicated that the majority of the components of the centres constitute a standard quality, that centres have hard, institutional like qualities and that adult standards predominate. Analysis of 38 questionnaires returned from the directors and staff of the centres and evidence from the data and descriptive material, revealed there was a significant lack of knowledge or concern for the child's intrinsic needs, and the role of the visual and physical environment in learning. Their concern within the the learning environment was primarily for the physical aspects and changes to those aspects and arts activities were made according to adult standards. Apparent in the data was an adult product oriented approach to arts activities. What is recommended in this study is the need for early childhood educators to recognize the importance of the visual and physical environment to learning, and the role arts activities play in the total development of a pre-school child. Further recommendations include the investigation of training programmes for day care personnel, and the development of, through co-operation with arts educators, artists and architects, environmental alternatives for learning.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".