Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this qualitative study was to investigate successful implementation of teacher- parent collaboration in elementary classrooms. The primary research question guiding this study was: What strategies and methods do a small sample of elementary teachers use to foster a collaborative relationship with parents and what benefits have they observed for their students? Data was collected through semi-structured interviews with two elementary teachers currently working in Halton District School Board schools. For the participants of this study, teacher- parent collaboration aided in the overall learning experience for their entire class as well as improved their classroom management strategies. The findings of this study suggests that teacher-parent collaboration is enhanced when teachers use the knowledge they have gleaned from their previous experiences, both personal and professional. The implications of these findings point out that teacher-parent collaboration is significantly impacted by the role teachers, school administrators, school boards and the Ministry of Education play. Considering these implications, there are some significant changes that need to be implemented to see the full benefit for teacher-parent collaboration in Ontario classrooms. One example is a focus for administrators and schools boards to offer professional development workshops on implementing successful teacher-parent collaboration. By gaining a broader understanding of collaboration, teachers would be better equipped to work with parents and overcome challenges they may face. Ultimately, this study has pointed to the essential nature of teacher-parent collaboration as well as the commitment that teachers need to have to be successful.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.037 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".