MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2519412911 · doi:10.1080/00220671.2015.1118005

Assessment in play-based kindergarten classrooms: An empirical study of teacher perspectives and practices

2016· article· en· W2519412911 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Educational Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCollaborative Teaching and Inclusion
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccountabilityPsychologyMathematics educationPedagogyEarly childhood educationPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kindergarten education is changing. Current reforms have increased accountability structures requiring teachers to integrate assessments throughout their instruction to support academic learning while retaining developmentally appropriate pedagogies such as play-based learning. Despite these reforms, comparatively little research has been conducted on teachers' assessment practices within play-based instructional contexts. The purpose of this study was to explore teachers' approaches to assessment in play-based kindergarten education and specifically to examine how assessment practices differed based on teachers' conceptions of the purpose of play in student learning. Data were obtained from 77 Ontario kindergarten teachers via (a) an electronic survey, (b) in-depth interviews, and (c) classroom observations. Overall, data from this study suggest a misalignment in teachers' perspectives of the purpose of play and what teachers assess during periods of play.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.163
Threshold uncertainty score0.772

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.198
GPT teacher head0.582
Teacher spread0.384 · 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