Book Review of Alexander, Jessica Joelle and Iben Dissing Sandhal. (2016). The Danish Way of Parenting: What the Happiest People in the World Know About Raising Confident, Capable Kids. New York: Tarcher Perigree.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Jessica Alexander and Iben Sandahl's book, "The Danish Way of Parenting," clearly describes the essential components of childhood and parental development.The book is constructed to educate the audience about how the Danish people went about their parenting strategies and what attributes they feel are essential to instill into their children.Attributes are the composition of people's identity; things like self-growth, resilience, authenticity, reframing, and empathy were all components that Alexander and Sandahl included as necessary to achieve this ideal and well-rounded child.Different characteristics can be developed and influenced through what parents felt was beneficial for their children to learn as it would assist in developing them into a strong and self-reliant individual.Parents have the ultimate responsibility of helping with the development of their children as in what they emphasize as crucial aspects for character and how they chose to teach and further expand their children's understanding of these aspects.Alexander and Sandahl expressed the importance of self-growth as they view it as a necessary thing that is needed to be done throughout a lifetime to expand personal abilities.As stated in the book, "in Denmark, parents try not to intervene unless it's absolutely necessary" (p.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.049 | 0.031 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".