MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2844564906 · doi:10.20355/jcie29339

Educating children and youth in care in Alberta: a scoping review

2018· review· en· W2844564906 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Munya Hwami

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Contemporary Issues in Education · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Welfare and Adoption
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDominance (genetics)Child careWork (physics)PsychologyPolitical scienceEconomic growthMedical educationPedagogyNursingMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alberta Education and Alberta Children Services have reported consistent low achievement in school by children and youth in care, especially those in residential group care. This article provides the current picture of research and practice (policy) regarding the learning experience of children and youth in care. Utilizing a scoping review of local and international research studies, the paper argues that the education of children in care in Alberta is not considered an important issue. The dominance of the social work paradigm in children and family services is exposed as inadequate, and hence the call for social pedagogy to be adopted. Determinants of educational achievement for children and youth in care are examined and using these attainment factors, the article identifies and recommends areas that Alberta Education and Alberta Children Services need to consider with urgency if children and youth in care are to benefit from schooling like all other children.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.780
Threshold uncertainty score0.437

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0090.012
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.377 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Contemporary Issues in EducationSame topicChild Welfare and AdoptionFrench-language works237,207