MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W7161764040 · doi:10.82308/25659

Being and becoming an 'I want to learn person' : participating in an arts-oriented learning environment : perception and context

2005· dissertation· en· W7161764040 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
E. Carolyn Sturge Sparkes

Notice bibliographique

Revuenon disponible
Typedissertation
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueArt Education and Development
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésContext (archaeology)PerceptionTrustworthinessThe artsEthnographyField (mathematics)Dynamics (music)Qualitative research

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The push for educational reform in the province of Quebec, Canada has brought to the foreground many ideas about what needs to be done to improve the learning experience of students. While there has been some movement in the primary grade levels, change in the secondary level is still in its infancy. There are some teachers, however, in high schools who have been on the cutting edge of educational reform. The purpose of this study is to look at participation within a secondary classroom where the philosophy of the reform is being acted upon. The study, qualitative in design, is a type of ethnographic investigation of a teacher and students in a Grade VII language arts classroom. The classroom is a part of an exclusive program, namely the Alternative Learning Program, nested in a public high school in the Montreal area. Using various means of data collection such as field notes and interviews, the researcher examines the various dimensions of participation as it unfolds in this particular classroom. The researcher identifies these dimensions as assigned and shared participation. The data suggests that dynamics beyond assigned and shared participation are also evident. The dynamics, identified as participative tone, contribute to student views of the uniqueness of this particular learning environment. To present a trustworthy description of what is observed, however, the investigator shows situations in which participation is not apparent. These situations are identified as participative resistance. The researcher deduces that participation and participative resistance need to be viewed as context-bound and are, in many respects, points on a continuum. Attempts have been made in the research to allow the study participants to express their views. Through interviews, students share in their own words what participation means to them. Their words add depth to understanding of what student participation is. The study suggests that notions of the child-centered or student-centered classroom, while commendable, are not necessarily an aspiration to strive for. The study affirms that the teacher plays a key position in the classroom environment. The study begins by showing the various roles that the teacher assumes in her daily practice. Views of the teacher are presented along with perceptions of the students and the researcher to determine the various roles played out in this site. The study concludes that the teacher conducts her practice by exceeding the boundaries of her roles so identified. The study shows that the classroom does not stand in isolation, but is subject to various influences from the school, as well as the community at large. The researcher identifies these influences as context and conditions using another site as a point of reference. The secondary sight brings clarity to what the researcher observes. The researcher concludes that in addition to communal influences, learning in the primary site takes place under the banner of what is defined as an arts-oriented curriculum. The arts-oriented curriculum contributes to the sense of community in the classroom. But data also suggest that the classroom does not always function as a community. In spite of the teacher's good intentions, tensions sometimes foster a competitive rather than collaborative spirit among 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 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)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: Qualitatif
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,119
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,997

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

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

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,053
Tête enseignante GPT0,296
Écart entre enseignants0,243 · 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 tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeQualitatif
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
Publié2005
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même sujetArt Education and DevelopmentTravaux en français237 207