School Determinants of Achievement in Writing: Implications for School Management in Minority Settings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: This study identified school factors that determined writing achievement for 13- and 16-year-old Francophone students in minority (Manitoba, Ontario, New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia) and majority settings (Quebec) (N = 5700). Factor analysis retained three factors subjected to binary logistic regression with students’ academic performance: Human and Material Resources and School-Community-Family Relations; Principal’s Vision and Beliefs; and Rules and Procedures. Logistic regression found two major determinants in writing achievement: Human and Material Resources and School-Community-Family Relations, and Principal’s Vision and Beliefs. In minority settings, the t-test showed significant deficits affecting the school’s ability to provide teaching programs in terms of Human and Material Resources and School-Community-Family Relations. The influence of both principals and teaching staff (individually) on general activities, school programs, and staff morale was weaker in the minority than in the majority contexts, in contrast to community support, school spirit, and students’ and teachers’ level of pride, which were stronger in minority settings.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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".