MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2773747715 · doi:10.18357/jcs.v42i3.17890

Children’s Responses to Different Types of Teacher Involvement During Free Play

2017· article· en· W2773747715 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Childhood Studies · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEarly Childhood Education and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Literacy AssociationUniversity of DelawareUniversity of California, Los AngelesU.S. Department of Education
KeywordsClass (philosophy)PsychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="page" title="Page 1"><div class="layoutArea"><div class="column"><div class="page" title="Page 1"><div class="section"><div class="layoutArea"><div class="column"><p><span>This qualitative study uses secondary data from videos of 11 teachers in community childcare settings to explore the different roles that teachers use to facilitate play and the way children respond to teachers’ behaviours within these roles. Results suggest that specific teacher behaviours within the roles they adopt elicit three types of children’s responses: ignore/reject, evaluative, and acceptance behaviours. The co- player and play leader roles were often associated with children’s acceptance behaviours and were considered more appropriate for teachers to support children’s development. </span></p></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.224
Threshold uncertainty score0.805

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.311 · 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