MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1507729963 · doi:10.1177/104515959901100305

Participating, Learning, Changing: Literacy Research in Practice in Alberta

2000· article· en· W1507729963 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueAdult Learning · 2000
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueTeacher Education and Leadership Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésLiteracyParticipatory action researchConversationPedagogyCitizen journalismSociologyAction researchReading (process)PsychologyMedical educationPolitical scienceMedicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Towards the end of an Alberta literacy research in practice project, a participant commented: ... research--I assumed I couldn't understand a word they said. Now I know I can talk about it, ... I have confidence in how I understand it. I'm not afraid of research; I used to be afraid, but now I am interested and excited. Like others in the project, this participant previously viewed research as a world apart from her daily work in a literacy program. By reading research reports, talking with others about research, and conducting research herself, she began to embrace the possibilities of research in practice. Encouraging and supporting research in practice were core aims of the Alberta-based Participatory Approaches in Adult Literacy Education/Research in Practice (PAALE/RiP) Project. Through this project, six literacy educators, including me, initiated participatory approaches projects with groups of adult learners and conducted research about the projects. We learned about participatory approaches, about our practices and about ourselves. Seeds and Roots The Alberta research in practice projects came about through a series of opportunities. My interest in the concept of research in practice was seeded at a National Literacy Secretariat conversation about literacy research policy, held in Ottawa in 1996. I was inspired by discussions about supporting literacy practitioners and learners to conduct research themselves. This interest was shared by Yvon Laberge, an Edmonton-based literacy researcher who also attended the policy conversation. Yvon and I met to imagine ways to encourage practitioner research in Alberta. Through consultation with colleagues in other provinces, we found an interest in research in practice and identified barriers to practitioners engaging in research. This led to a fall 1997 seminar in Edmonton where 18 practitioners and researchers from across Canada shared ideas and set some directions for literacy research in practice.(2) The seminar was also an opportunity to develop relationships, an important step in building a research in practice network. The PAALE/RiP Project The Learning Centre and the University of Alberta Faculty of Education initiated the PAALE/RiP Project in 1998. The project built on participatory experiences at the Learning Centre and responded to interests in participatory approaches among Alberta literacy educators and learners. It also incorporated ideas from the previous research in practice activities by supporting practitioners to engage in research. The six who participated in the project were from urban and rural communities across Alberta. Grace Malicky, who was then Associate Dean of Research at the University of Alberta Faculty of Education, agreed to be a research facilitator for the project. Grace had a long-standing interest in adult literacy and a commitment to supporting research and practice. The university contributed Grace's time and she arranged for other university contributions, including provision of an online graduate level course that we co-facilitated. The PAALE/RiP project participants enrolled in the course, along with four graduate students. The course included a set of modules about participatory approaches and another set about research. Course discussion and communication was carried out through a computer-based conferencing system and two face-to-face meetings. By the end of the course, PAALE/RiP project members had initiated participatory approaches projects and related research with groups of adult learners. Research topics included using themes to enhance cultural knowledge, benefits of learner participation, problem solving in a group, sharing facilitating roles with learners and sharing power. One study, initiated on the topic of needs assessment, led to learning why adults don't enroll in programs. Research approaches, which varied according to topics and contexts, included practitioner research, action research and participatory action research (Malicky, 2000). …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,004
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMétarecherche, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,517
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0040,012
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,156
Tête enseignante GPT0,502
Écart entre enseignants0,346 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle