MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294292665 · doi:10.1177/01430343221122408

Classroom practices and peer social status in junior high school

2022· article· en· W4294292665 on OpenAlexaff
Maria Di Stasio, Robert Savage

Bibliographic record

VenueSchool Psychology International · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBullying, Victimization, and Aggression
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityMacEwan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyIntervention (counseling)Social statusPerceptionAssociation (psychology)Peer groupMathematics educationSocial psychologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the association between classroom practices and individual social status outcomes in junior high. A nested design using 678 grade 7 and 8 students in 38 classrooms showed that classroom practices are associated with peer social status. Classrooms rated high on instruction were associated with a decreased probability of students with rejected status. In contrast, classrooms rated high on atmosphere and student engagement were associated with an increased probability of students with rejected and popular status. Student perceptions of classrooms revealed that social comparison was associated with an increased probability of students with both rejected and popular status, while competition was associated with an increased probability of students with popular status. Results inform intervention programs that target the peer ecology of the classroom by raising teachers’ awareness of the intersection between pedagogical practices and student social status among peers.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.351 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSchool Psychology InternationalSame topicBullying, Victimization, and AggressionFrench-language works237,207