Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Johnston, J.S. (2009). Deweyan inquiry: From education theory to practice. Albany: Suny Press. 97 pages, ISBN: 978-0-7914-9355-7 Introduction Decades have passed since the paradigm shift in education theory regarding student-centredness altered learning and education; the aim was to have no more teacher-centered classrooms, no artificial textbook exercises, and no student passivity. The intended result of this shift was activity-based classrooms, in which students work together in groups on relevant tasks, experiment, and exchange thoughts and ideas in order to tackle problems and obstacles to gain an extensive understanding of the matter. In this model, the teacher accompanies students as a facilitator. Today, however, peeping into classrooms, one has to admit that--for whatever reasons--the textbooks have somehow found a way to prevail. One can still hear the teacher speak for most of the time, and relevant tasks and projects are initiated scarcely. James Scott Johnston tries to contribute to the understanding of this divide between education theory and practice by having a closer look into Dewey's comprehensive work. He puts his focus of attention onto the so-called and takes a closer look at the most important terms of Dewey's theory of education and pragmatism. He clearly states, however, that his work is not intended to substitute Dewey's work, but that his overall aim is to point out how can be of use in several fields of education, such as science education, social science education, art and art education, and embodiment and physical education. Johnston starts off with a general introduction into the idea of inquiry, the specific context in which inquiry can take place and what the methods and techniques of inquiry look like. The reader gets to know the ideas behind various terms--such as situation, self-correction, and universal conception--that make up the character of inquiry. He then successively works himself through the educational areas that have been named above, first of all science education, a context in which inquiry is the most likely to occur or to be practiced. The familiarity of these subjects with the nature of inquiry derives from the tradition of experimentation and testing of physical and chemical laws. But Johnston clearly points out that one would be mistaken to reduce inquiry solely to the context of these experimentations. Sciences such as biology, geography, and mathematics provide a far wider range of contexts to which inquiry can be applied. A second area he discusses is social science education. There, he points out that it is the existential situations of people in all their manifestations, which are investigated (p. 48). He eventually looks at art and art education as well as embodiment and physical education and argues them to be as highly important for inquiry as any other subject. As a conclusion, James Scott Johnston summarizes the most important elements of inquiry within the fields of education that he has discussed. It becomes obvious that one of teachers' hardest tasks is to establish an unsettled situation in which a problem is created--a problem that is genuine for the students--but at the same time one of the essential elements for a successful inquiry classroom. Discussion Johnston takes the overall aim of this book--to show how inquiry works in various fields of education--very seriously. …
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,023 | 0,023 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,005 | 0,006 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,042 |
| Communication savante | 0,017 | 0,035 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,010 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,009 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,002 |
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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».