MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2738050585 · doi:10.1142/s021964921750023x

Prediction Model of School Readiness

2017· article· en· W2738050585 on OpenAlexaff
Iyad Suleiman, Maha Arslan, Reda Alhajj, Mick Ridley

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Information & Knowledge Management · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOnline Learning and Analytics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExcellenceCreativityNeighbourhood (mathematics)Data collectionPsychologyMathematics educationSociologySocial psychologyPolitical scienceSocial scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Studying the school readiness is an interesting domain that has attracted the attention of the public and private sectors in education. Researchers have developed some techniques for assessing the readiness of preschool kids to start school. Here we benefit from an integrated approach which combines Data Mining (DM) and social network analysis towards a robust solution. The main objective of this study is to explore the socio-demographic variables (age, gender, parents' education, parents' work status, and class and neighbourhood peers influence), achievement data (Arithmetic Readiness, Cognitive Development, Language Development, Phonological Awareness), and data that may impact school readiness. To achieve this, we propose to apply DM techniques to predict school readiness. Real data on 306 preschool children was used from four different elementary schools: (1) Life school for Creativity and Excellence a private school located in Ramah village, (2) Sisters of Saint Joseph missionary school located in Nazareth, (3) Franciscan missionary school located in Nazareth and (4) Al-Razi public school located in Nazareth, and white-box classification methods, such as induction rules were employed. Experiments attempt to improve their accuracy for predicting which children might fail or dropout by first, using all the available attributes; next, selecting the best attributes; and finally, rebalancing data and using cost sensitive classification. The outcomes have been compared and the models with the best results are shown.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Information & Knowledge ManagementSame topicOnline Learning and AnalyticsFrench-language works237,207