MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309709624 · doi:10.1097/iyc.0000000000000232

A Conceptual Model for a Blended Intervention Approach to Support Early Language and Social-Emotional Development in Toddler Classrooms

2022· article· en· W4309709624 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer E. Cunningham, Jason C. Chow, Kathleen Artman-Meeker, Abby L. Taylor, Mary Louise Hemmeter, Ann P. Kaiser

Bibliographic record

VenueInfants & Young Children · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsGolder Associates (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionToddlerIntervention (counseling)PsychologyLanguage developmentClass (philosophy)Conceptual modelSocial emotional learningComputer scienceDevelopmental psychologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this article is to present a theory-driven blended intervention model that integrates evidence-based interventions to support language and social development of young children. We (1) provide an overview of practices that are designed to support language and social-emotional development, (2) present a theory of change model that outlines the theoretical basis for our proposed approach, and (3) provide an example of the conceptual model via the blending of Tier 1 interventions that provide class-wide language and behavioral support for young children. We conclude by arguing for the parsimony that a proactive synergy between social and language interventions blended into a single professional development approach will provide.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInfants & Young ChildrenSame topicLanguage Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207