MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2728034076

Focusing on Teacher-Student Interactions Eliminates the Negative Impact of Students' Disruptive Behavior on Teacher Perceptions.

2015· article· en· W2728034076 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher A. Hafen, Erik Ruzek, Anne Gregory, Joseph P. Allen, Amori Yee Mikami

Bibliographic record

VenueGrantee Submission · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral and Psychological Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyCoachingIntervention (counseling)Educational attainmentPsychological interventionPerceptionAssociation (psychology)Academic achievementMathematics education
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study tests the impact of a randomly assigned professional development coaching intervention (MyTeachingPartner-Secondary; MTP-S) on teacher projections of their students’ educational attainment. Results indicate that students who report more behavior problems in the Fall of the academic year are projected by teachers to have lower future educational attainment in the Spring of the academic year. However, analyses further indicate that participation in the MTP-S intervention moderates the association between Fall student behavior problems and teachers’ Spring projections for student attainment, such that this link is not significant for students in classrooms where the teacher is participating in MTP-S. In fact, results indicate that teachers who participate in the intervention project better educational attainment for their students than teachers who are in a business-as-usual control condition, regardless of their students’ behavior. Findings are discussed in terms of the role that interventions ta...

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)0.007
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.227
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGrantee SubmissionSame topicBehavioral and Psychological StudiesFrench-language works237,207