MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1489062146 · doi:10.20360/g2rw21

Mirrors and Windows: Teaching and Research Reflections on Canadian Aboriginal Children’s Literature

2015· article· en· W1489062146 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueLanguage and Literacy · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicThemes in Literature Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChristian ministryMetaphorSociologyHistoryPolitical scienceLinguisticsLawPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this reflective paper, an expanded version of my LLRC pre-conference paper, I draw on thirty or so years of teaching and research experience, augmented by the occasional foray into my childhood, to consider issues of resonance and representation in children’s literature. In doing so, I draw on Patsy Aldana’s speech, Books that are Windows. Books that are Mirrors. How Can we Make Sure that Children see Themselves in Their Books? Aldana, then President of the Canadian Coalition for School Libraries, delivered her speech to the IBBY (International Board on Books for Young People) Congress in Malaysia, 2008.[i]As a teacher and now as a teacher educator, I am reminded by Aldana’s speech to pay close attention to the children and youth who cannot take for granted, as I was able to, “hear(ing) one’s own words, see(ing) one’s own face…in a book” (Aldana, 2008).[i] In her speech, Aldana uses this metaphor as presented by Elisa Bonilla, former director of educational materials at the Mexican Ministry of Education (SEP) of Mexico, in her address to the IBBY congress in Macau, 2006.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.974
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.329 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it