MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2555290403

Reconsidering Dropout Prevention by Understanding Dropouts

2014· dissertation· en· W2555290403 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Eddie Gillis

Bibliographic record

VenueQSpace (Queen's University Library) · 2014
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicResilience and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDropout (neural networks)PsychologyComputer scienceMachine learning
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT
\n
\nKnowing that the decision to leave school before graduating has a dramatic effect on the lives of the people who make this choice, why would anyone leave school before graduating from high school in Canada? School is important, and parents bring their children to school brimming with the hope their children will do well. Notwithstanding this hope, every elementary school classroom in Canada has two or more children who are likely to drop out of school. If these children live in an inner-city or a reserve, the likelihood they will not graduate increases dramatically. In fact, Grade 1 teachers who teach on reserves in Canada can look at the students in their classrooms and know that more than half of these students are unlikely to graduate. This project is an attempt to address this issue by understanding more about why students drop out, particularly students who are disadvantaged due to low socioeconomic status (SES) and/or Aboriginal status. It consists of a general introduction to the topic (Chapter 1), an extensive review of theories with respect to dropping out (Chapter 2), two workshops, one to increase understanding of these theories and another that addresses the effects poverty has on the neurocognitive development of children (Chapter 3), and reflections on the process (Chapter 4). It is largely intended for teachers and administrators who would like to understand the dropout phenomenon and increase graduation rates for disadvantaged students.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.186
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQSpace (Queen's University Library)Same topicResilience and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207