Parenting practices during middle adolescence and high school dropout
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Despite inconclusive findings, educational researchers have long considered adequate parenting practices instrumental in preventing high school dropout among adolescents. The present short-term retrospective study focuses on parenting practices during middle adolescence when dropout typically occurs. METHODS: = 16.0 years) from low-income neighborhoods included very recent dropouts and matched still-in-school students. A global score reflecting the quality of parenting practices during the period preceding dropout (or comparable period) was derived from adolescents' answers to a well-established structured interview protocol. Transcripts of interviews were also used to identify the potentially disruptive challenges (e.g., parental incarceration) that families faced. RESULTS: Results show a robust relationship between current parenting practices and dropout that was not moderated by challenging family circumstances or immigration history. Descriptive findings indicate that extreme and relatively rare cases of parental neglect were associated with a high dropout risk, but that most dropouts lived in families where communication and supervision, although not entirely absent, were minimal. CONCLUSION: Offering systematic support to parents of middle adolescents could help to prevent dropout in high-risk communities.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".