The Voices of Disengaged Youth: A Narrative Inquiry of At-Risk Students Attending Alternative Schools in British Columbia
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The primary purpose of this study was to understand the experiences of students who attend alternate schools in British Columbia. The intent was to give them an opportunity to speak of their experiences and thoughts about school, both past and present, with the hope of generating an understanding of the perspectives students bring to school. This study employed a narrative inquiry approach in an attempt to answer the following questions: What are the experiences of school of students who currently attend an alternative school in BC? What does school mean to these students and how do they make and engage with these meanings? How do these students understand themselves as learners and how does school fit into their lives? What would make school better for these students? Semi-structured interviews were conducted with students. Once this fieldwork was completed, data were analyzed using a pluralistic approach that employed the concepts of Polkinghorne‘s narrative analysis as a construct to share the stories of the participants and his analysis of narrative as a means of constructing themes from the stories. Using the work of Furlong et al.. (2003) as a framework for student engagement: the Student Context, the Peer Context, the Classroom Context, and the School-wide Context, data were analyzed for themes. From the perspective of the students‘ experiences, this study found that throughout their time in a traditional school setting, periods of disengagement for the students in this study are rooted in a lack of strong peer relationships, the absence of a meaningful relationship with their teacher, the inadequate supports to meet their unique learning challenges, and the absence of relevant and interesting school work. Conversely, the participants of this study experienced engagement in an alternative setting. As such, this study reveals a need for the education system to be more responsive to student needs in these areas through intentional reflection on the part of educators iii and a shift from a school-centred system to a student-centred system, where educators critically examine the constructs of the system as opposed to the perceived shortcomings of the students.
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.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».