Schoolwide Enrichment: Improving the Education of Students (at Risk) at Promise.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The term at-risk students encompasses many categories of children and youth: who become pregnant, those who commit crimes, those who commit suicide, those who drop out (Martin, 1991, p. 69). Educational concern with at-risk students is not simply that they are failing to learn, but also that they will enter adulthood illiterate, dependent upon drugs and alcohol, unemployed or under employed, as a teenage parent, dependent on welfare, or adjudicated by the criminal justice system (Barr & Parrett, 1995, p. 3). The ultimate risk that students face is that they become disconnected from the functions of society, from economic productivity, and as citizens in a democracy IHIHIHHilM (Johnson, 1997a, p. 35). Collectively referred to as Genevieve Marie risk outcomes, the negative life experiences that Johnson is a lecturer in threaten at-risk students include high school drop the Department of out, suicidal behavior, adult dependency, substance Educational Psychology abuse, incarceration, and unwanted sexual experi of the Faculty of enees such as pregnancy and disease (Johnson, 1998a). Education at the Given this broad range of adverse outcomes, it has University of Alberta, been suggested that approximately one-third of chil Edmonton, Alberta, dren could be considered at risk (Hamburg, 1992; Canada. Takanishi, 1993).
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 teacher head, 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".