MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2603505985 · doi:10.3138/jcfs.33.4.529

The Relationship Between Parental Involvement and Children’s Educational Achievement in the Korean Immigrant Family

2002· article· en· W2603505985 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Eunjung Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Comparative Family Studies · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicParental Involvement in Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDevelopmental psychologyImmigrationPsychologyAcademic achievementTest (biology)Political science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the relationship between parental involvement and children’s educational achievement in the Korean American family. The primary purposes are to examine the extent and characteristics of parental involvement and the consequences of children’s educational achievement. Various dimensions of parental involvement are measured as separate variables. Data from a sample of children aged 12 through 14 (n = 209) and their parents (n = 209) are used to test the research hypothesis.***Parental involvement in the Korean American family is characterized by an extremely high level of home based parental involvement and a comparatively much lower level of school based parental involvement. Parents’ education level and English proficiency substantially influence the extent of parental involvement and children’s educational achievement. Thus, we could conclude that reflecting both traditional cultural norms and the levels of parents’ adaptation to their new world, the parental involvement of the Korean American family revealed its own distinctive characteristics and impact on children’s educational achievement.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.246
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.167 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations161
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Comparative Family StudiesSame topicParental Involvement in EducationFrench-language works237,207