MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W281730538

The Role of Motivation in Secondary Mathematics Instruction: Implications for RTI

2011· article· en· W281730538 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

VenueSound Ideas (University of Puget Sound) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Practices and Evaluation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationPsychologyPedagogyMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Response to Intervention--what do we know about it, why does it work, and how can teachers use it to ensure high-quality K-12 math instruction? Find out in this definitive research volume, edited by National Math Panel veteran Russell Gersten with contributions by all of the country's leading researchers on RTI and math. Current and future RTI coordinator's curriculum developers, math specialists, and department heads will get the best, most up-to-date research and guidance on key facets of RTI in math: conducting valid and reliable universal screening in mathematics; using evidence-based practices to provide a strong general education curriculum for effective Tier 1 instruction; implementing explicit, research-based teaching practices for students who need Tier 2 and 3 instruction; monitoring students' progress with high-quality tools and measures; motivating and engaging struggling students receiving Tier 2 and 3 instruction; teaching students to use an array of visual representations to help them solve math problems; tailoring RTI for every grade level, from kindergarten through high school; and using RTI to target specific mathematical proficiencies and concepts, such as number sense, word problems, algebra, and ratios and proportions. Filled with vignettes, accessible summaries of research studies, and best-practice guidelines for making the most of RTI, this comprehensive volume is ideal for use as a textbook or as a key resource to guide both practitioners and decision makers. Readers will have the knowledge base they need to strengthen mathematics instruction with proven RTI practices--and help ensure better math outcomes for students at every grade level.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.148
Threshold uncertainty score0.466

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.236 · 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