MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2903133855 · doi:10.33524/cjar.v19i2.384

COLLABORATIVE ACTION RESEARCH TO IMPLEMENT SOCIAL-EMOTIONAL LEARNING IN A RURAL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL: HELPING STUDENTS BECOME “LITTLE KIDS WITH BIG WORDS”

2018· article· en· W2903133855 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Donna M. San Antonio

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Action Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEarly Childhood Education and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHarvard University
KeywordsFacilitatorAction researchPsychologyPedagogyGeneral partnershipMathematics educationSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research has shown that social and emotional learning (SEL) can benefit students in affective, interpersonal, communicative, and academic realms. However, teachers integrating SEL face a variety of logistical, pedagogical, and skill development challenges, including how to effectively facilitate classroom conversations on social justice and personal loss. This article draws from classroom observations, teacher conversations, interactive journals, and field notes to describe a seven-month-long university-school partnership to carry out an action research project in a high-poverty rural elementary school in the US. Teachers grappled with how to address race, immigration, and gender discrimination in a predominantly White community. Classroom vignettes, and teacher and author reflections, illustrate the iterative, developmental, and reciprocal aspects of learning between teachers and students, and between the university-based facilitator and teachers.

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)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.121

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.008
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0040.010
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.167
GPT teacher head0.503
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Action ResearchSame topicEarly Childhood Education and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207