MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3163064328

Prekindergarten Teachers’ Conceptualization of Readiness in the Era of Standards-based Accountability Reform Movements

2014· article· en· W3163064328 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jae Eun Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueEarly childhood education · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEarly Childhood Education and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConceptualizationAccountabilityEarly childhood educationEarly childhoodLearning standardsPsychologyPreschool educationPedagogyMathematics educationPolitical scienceDevelopmental psychologyCurriculum
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current standards-based accountability reforms in the United States understand early childhood education as a means of preparing young children for academic success in elementary school. These policies have triggered an important debate concerning the proper way to conceptualize children’s readiness for elementary school. This article discusses the findings of a case study that examined how early childhood education reform affects prekindergarten teachers’ conceptualization of readiness. The results obtained highlight problems concerning the teaching of specific content to young children. These problems are related to the assimilation of prekindergarten programs into the U.S. K-12 education system. This research also provides information concerning the skills and knowledge that are most useful to early childhood educators operating within standards-based education systems and aiming to offer high-quality and effective instruction to young children.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.021
Scholarly communication0.0070.007
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarly childhood education→Same topicEarly Childhood Education and Development→French-language works237,207→