Online Teacher and On-Site Facilitator Perceptions of Parental Engagement at a Supplemental Virtual High School
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
Just as they have in face-to-face courses, parents will likely play an important role in lowering online student attrition rates, but more research is needed that identifies ways parents can engage in their students’ online learning. In this research we surveyed and interviewed 12 online teachers and 12 on-site facilitators regarding their experiences and perceptions of parental engagement. Guided by the Adolescent Community of Engagement framework, our analysis found that teachers and facilitators valued parents’ engagement when parents advised students on course enrollments, nurtured relationships and communication with and between students, monitored student progress, motivated students to engage in learning activities, organized and managed students’ learning time at home, and instructed students regarding study strategies and course content when able. Teachers and facilitators also identified obstacles that parents faced when attempting to engage in their children’s online learning as well as obstacles that teachers and facilitators encountered when they attempted to support parents.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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