MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2461552831 · doi:10.1002/trtr.1502

Literacy for All

2016· article· en· W2461552831 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jan Lacina, Robin Griffith

Notice bibliographique

RevueThe Reading Teacher · 2016
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineComputer Science
ThématiqueEducational Methods and Media Use
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésLiteracyGlobeReading (process)Transformative learningPovertyPedagogyPsychologySociologyPublic relationsMathematics educationPolitical scienceLaw

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

“One child, one teacher, one book, and one pen can change the world.” Malala Yousafzai's now-famous words inspired and motivated us as new editors as we planned new journal departments and invited editorial review board members. The power of one teacher to make a difference in the life of a child is transformative, inspirational; it gives us hope for a better future for all children in the world. With our new editorship, we seek to focus on the literacy needs of all children across the globe. Literacy gives each and every child the chance for success, and The Reading Teacher offers examples of teachers who truly make that difference. Over the last decade, school demographics have shifted; many countries have been in turmoil because of war, and poverty continues to be one of the greatest challenges to students becoming literate. In addition to these challenges, teachers also struggle with how to meet the literacy needs of students who come from diverse socioeconomic, linguistic, cultural, and racial backgrounds while providing the highest quality literacy instruction. As we planned the departments for our incoming editorship, we continually returned to this question: How can educators continue to transform teaching to meet the needs and interests of today's children through a broader, more comprehensive view of literacy? This question is important to us as literacy researchers, as former public school teachers, and as current parents of school-age children. The Reading Teacher has a rich legacy as a result of the accomplishments of the previous editors, the dedication of past editorial reviewers, and the passionate teachers and researchers who publish their work with the journal. We aim to maintain the same high quality for which the journal is known worldwide. To complement ILA's dedication to making literacy a right for all children, we chose the theme literacy for all for Volume 70. In each issue, we aim to offer a global view of literacy. As you read about the new departments, you may notice that focus as well as a continued emphasis on the classroom teacher and exemplary research-based teaching practices. We are particularly excited about this first issue of the journal, and we hope you will enjoy it as much as we do. With that, we provide you a summary of the contents. Our world is much more digitally connected than it was a decade ago, and that opens up the possibilities for expanding literacy. It also gives us a greater responsibility for combating illiteracy; we have the opportunity to broaden the field to be inclusive in ways that we may not have been in the past. To begin this month's journal, Lucy Calkins and Mary Ehrenworth of Teachers College, Columbia University, approach the literacy for all theme by focusing on leadership decisions in schools and districts that can raise the level of writing. We learn from their article new ways of thinking about writing for all children. We think you will enjoy this article and find ways to implement its recommendations in your schools. There are two departments published in this issue: Digital Literacy and Global Literacy. In the Digital Literacy article, Jennifer Rowsell of Brock University, Canada, takes readers on a digital literacy road trip as she searches the world for wisdom and insight from experts across the globe. The Global Literacy department is authored by Bernadette Dwyer of St. Patrick's College, Dublin City University, Ireland, who details excellent ways to build global literacy through technology. Both authors build on a global theme that helps us all remember that literacy is an important topic worldwide. In the seven feature articles in this issue, we intentionally selected a variety of topics to represent literacy for all. Whether in the field of science or in building academic language in an early childhood classroom, literacy is important in all content areas, for all ages, and for all types of students. Today's teachers are knowledgeable about a variety of topics and search for articles that meet their needs for teaching their diverse student body. This month's feature articles will prepare you for thinking about summer reading programs and ways to facilitate academic language in the early childhood classroom. You will also read about exploring literature circles through informational texts and ways to teach first graders to comprehend complex texts through read-alouds. We hope reading these articles will inspire you over the summer months, just as they invigorated us about teaching and learning. In this issue, you will also find a variety of Teaching Tips that focus on literacy for all. These teaching tips offer educators ideas from using technology to support professional learning communities to using picture books to start conversations about autism. Last but just as important, Voices From the Classroom features the voices of classroom teachers speaking about their practical and successful experiences from the field. We think you will enjoy reading “WrestleMania Meets Reading Mania” by Barclay Marcell. In each journal issue, we will continue to focus on articles that hold relevance to teaching and classrooms throughout the world. Most importantly, we will always remember Malala's words: “One child, one teacher, one book, and one pen can change the world.” Articles in this issue not only offer us hope but also explain research-based strategies for teaching all children well. We hope you will enjoy the issue as much as we do!

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,174
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,582

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,009
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0030,002
Communication savante0,0100,006
Science ouverte0,0010,007
Intégrité de la recherche0,0030,006
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,1740,126

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 Opus0,059
Tête enseignante GPT0,374
Écart entre enseignants0,315 · 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

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2016
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueThe Reading TeacherMême sujetEducational Methods and Media UseTravaux en français237 207