MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416864429 · doi:10.1177/1476718x251391018

Toward a hybrid model of quality for Quebec early childhood education: A structured group approach with diverse stakeholders

2025· article· en· W4416864429 on OpenAlexaffabout
Liesette Brunson, Joanne Lehrer, Alexandra Paquette, Lise Lemay

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Early Childhood Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEarly Childhood Education and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en OutaouaisUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEarly childhoodEarly childhood educationStakeholderExcellenceDiversity (politics)Quality (philosophy)Best practiceCenter of excellenceProcess (computing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although extensive research has demonstrated the benefits of high-quality early childhood education, established quality frameworks often overlook the perspectives of stakeholders who are central to local improvement. Leveraging Quebec, Canada’s tradition of exemplary early childhood education (ECE), this study explored the concept of ECE quality with multiple stakeholder groups across the province, including parents, educators, administrators, and researchers. A structured group concept-mapping process identified seven components that participants saw as important for excellence in center-based early childhood education, including ideas not present in established quality frameworks. Participants viewed an exemplary ECE center as one that (1) offers children choices and stimulating learning experiences based on exploration and play, (2) adopts best practices in ECE, (3) ensures that staff have developmentally sensitive knowledge and skills, (4) provides professional support and good working conditions for staff, (5) partners with families and the community, (6) values diversity and inclusion, and (7) offers a stimulating physical and nutritional environment. These results suggest a Quebec-specific model of ECE quality spanning multiple ecological levels that reflects widely accepted scientific concepts as well as locally relevant ideas emerging from stakeholders’ perspectives. In addition to suggesting components for a Quebec-specific, stakeholder-driven model of quality, the research described in this article offers ideas and methods for similar initiatives in other contexts.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.844
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.137
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Early Childhood ResearchSame topicEarly Childhood Education and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207