A framework for school-family collaboration integrating some relevant factors and processes
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Collaboration between the school and the family is increasingly privileged as one of the means to promote educational success and perseverance. This is based among other things on a sharing of responsibilities between parents and teachers. Although knowledge has evolved in relation to collaborative school-family relationships, it has far from developed in all Qubec schools. The division of responsibilities appears more rhetorical than practical. More work must be done. The objectives of this paper are to (1) conduct an overview of parental involvement and school-family collaboration literature under the angles of concept definitions and influential factors; and drawing on Hoover-Dempsey et al. 's models (1997, 2010), and 2) to propose an integrative model of factors and processes linked to parental involvement and school-family collaboration. Given that the challenges facing teachers appear to have increased exponentially and that parents' conditions for exercising their role have become more complex, it appears to be timely to have parents and teachers sitting together and share their vision in order to develop a common understanding and a collective vision of the current situation regarding school-family collaboration. The proposed integrative framework is intended to provide a tool to the main actors eager to engage in a reflective activity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it