MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2887933857 · doi:10.1177/1053815118789177

Implementation of Arkansas’s Initiative to Reduce Suspension and Expulsion of Young Children

2018· article· en· W2887933857 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nicola A. Conners Edge, A. Fraser Rose, Deneice Honeycutt, Lorraine McKelvey, Taren Swindle, Diana Courson, Lauren B. Fox

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Early Intervention · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Discipline and Inequality
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAdministration for Children and FamiliesCenters for Disease Control and PreventionU.S. Department of Education
KeywordsFormative assessmentPsychologyChild careWorkforceTracking (education)Quarter (Canadian coin)Medical educationEarly childhood educationPedagogyNursingPolitical scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article describes the development, initial implementation, and formative evaluation of Arkansas’s plan to reduce suspensions and expulsion from early care and education (ECE) settings. We describe how Arkansas used multifaceted implementation strategies to facilitate change in six areas: policy, workforce development, specialized supports, family partnerships, child screening, and data tracking. We also highlight key findings from the formative evaluation. For example, needs assessment data revealed that 40.8% of ECE providers suspended at least one child in the past year, and 9% expelled one or more children. We evaluated efforts to educate ECE providers on new nonexpulsion policies and new supports, and results indicate that 89.5% of directors agreed that they understand why young children should not be suspended or expelled, though the majority reported concern about implementing a nonexpulsion policy. Initial utilization data from a new ECE provider support system indicate that in the first quarter, 53 requests were submitted for help with challenging classroom behavior. Most requests involved male children over the age of 3, and one-third of the requests referenced traumatic events experienced by the 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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
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 score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.186

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.389 · 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

Citations21
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Early InterventionSame topicEducation Discipline and InequalityFrench-language works237,207