MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402718177 · doi:10.55016/ojs/ajer.v51i2.55123

Youth Speaks Up: Perceived Communication Changes Experienced by Grade 6 Participants in a Personal Development Program

2005· article· en· W4402718177 on OpenAlexaffvenue
M. Tanya Brann-Barrett

Bibliographic record

VenueAlberta Journal of Educational Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCollaborative Teaching and Inclusion
Canadian institutionsCape Breton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologySocial psychologyApplied psychologyPositive Youth DevelopmentDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A nine-month program entitled Youth Speaks Up is delivered annually to grade 6 students from Sydney, Nova Scotia. One goal of the program is to provide an opportunity for the development of positive communication skills in participants. The purpose of this project was to determine if students participating in the program perceived changes in their communication ability and comfort level as a result of participation in the program. Qualitative focus groups were conducted, and responses suggest that many participants experienced positive changes in their communication comfort levels in public and interpersonal communication contexts, and specifically in their ability and willingness to express their ideas. Participants believed factors such as consistent practice and interaction with new people influenced the changes. Students’ recommendations for program development are also presented.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.201
GPT teacher head0.493
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 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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlberta Journal of Educational ResearchSame topicCollaborative Teaching and InclusionFrench-language works237,207