MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2550860855 · doi:10.5296/jse.v6i4.10151

Using Images to Capture Faculty’s Beliefs About Play and Learning in Early Childhood Education and Care Settings

2016· article· en· W2550860855 on OpenAlex
Marleah Blom, Miranda D’Amico

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Studies in Education · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Environments and Student Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEarly childhood educationEarly childhoodPsychologyQualitative researchChild careDevelopmentally Appropriate PracticePedagogyMedical educationDevelopmental psychologyMedicineNursingSociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Findings are presented from a qualitative research study that used photo-elicitation methods to explore faculty members’ beliefs about play and learning for children in Early Childhood Education and Care environments when teaching preservice early childhood educators in recognized post-secondary Early Childhood Education programs in Canada. Participants believe that play is a vehicle for learning, advocate for children’s free play in Early Childhood Education and Care settings as well as express concerns about the decline of play in children’s lives. Implications of findings and the benefits of using images to elicit teacher beliefs in research will be discussed. Research on faculty members’ beliefs is limited and findings come at an opportune time as advocacy for play in the early years is needed.

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)0.001
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 score0.115
Threshold uncertainty score0.244

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.361 · 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