MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1510330832 · doi:10.37119/ojs2010.v16i2.98

Not Making the Grade: A Narrative Inquiry Into Timmy’s Experiences With the Mandated Curriculum

2013· article· en· W1510330832 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Sonia T. Houle

Bibliographic record

Venuein education · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt Education and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumNarrativeSituatedPedagogySociocultural evolutionLived experienceCurriculum theorySociologyEmergent curriculumNarrative inquiryField (mathematics)Mathematics educationCurriculum developmentCurriculum mappingPsychologyComputer scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research draws on the experiences of a Grade 1 delayed reader, his parents, and his teachers, to show his lived curriculum across his home and school contexts. This narrative inquiry is situated in the literature of curriculum studies, in the notions of the lived curriculum and curriculum-making. Field texts include field notes from the classrooms, transcripts of conversations with the child, his parents, and his teachers. For this paper, I illustrate the child’s experiences at the end of Grade 1, among the tensions created between the lived curriculum of a struggling reader, and the expectations of the mandated curriculum, which are shaped by institutional and sociocultural narratives. My goal is to provide insight into making curriculum in schools that accounts for the lived curricula of all children.Keywords: lived curriculum; narrative inquiry; curriculum-making

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0170.030
Scholarly communication0.0100.011
Open science0.0020.011
Research integrity0.0030.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuein educationSame topicArt Education and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207