MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2906039525 · doi:10.15402/esj.v3i2.333

Developing an Evaluation Capacity Building Network in the Field of Early Childhood Development

2018· article· en· W2906039525 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

VenueEngaged Scholar Journal Community-Engaged Research Teaching and Learning · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEvaluation and Performance Assessment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapacity buildingCitizen journalismContext (archaeology)Field (mathematics)Early childhoodWork (physics)Capacity developmentStakeholder engagementCommunity developmentStakeholderSociologyEngineering ethicsPolitical sciencePublic relationsPsychologyComputer scienceEngineeringEnvironmental planningDevelopmental psychologyGeographyWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This reflective essay traces the development of an evaluation capacity building network within the early childhood development field. First, we describe the context for building the network using a community-based participatory approach and provide rationale for our specific focus on early childhood development. Second, we provide an explanation of the purpose and processes involved in three areas of significant engagement: partner, stakeholder, and student. We reflect on the methods of engagement used across these three areas and their impact on the outcomes that we achieved. Finally, we conclude the paper with some final considerations for guiding engaged scholars and with the next steps in our own work.

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)0.958
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.712
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.563
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.9580.712
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.2590.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.379
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 head0.531
GPT teacher head0.547
Teacher spread0.016 · 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