Wisconsin Family Impact Seminars 1 Risk Factors for Adolescent Academic Achievement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
about one quarter of the adolescent population is at risk of academic failure and other problem behaviors. Another quarter is considered “moderately” at risk (Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development, 1989, p. 8). The most seri-ous of the problems associated with school failure is the almost inevitable unem-ployment or underemployment that follows. The costs to society and to the individual are high. The nation pays the price not only in welfare payments, but in an estimated $260 billion in lost earnings and tax payments (Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development, 1989, p. 29). Prevalence of low academic achievement Academic achievement is measured in a variety of ways. The most commonly cited indicator is the rate of high school completion. Statistics also are available on grades, standardized test scores, absenteeism, suspensions and expulsions, and the percentage of students who have been held back. The following are often cited indicators of low achievement. Being below grade level Many students who repeat a grade ultimately will become discouraged and drop
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.226 | 0.020 |
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".