Action Research in the Classroom: A Process that Feeds the Spirit of the Adolescent
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Through action research the question “What nourishes the spirit of the adolescent in the classroom” was subjected to an inventive strategy. The inquiry centered around student-driven questions inserted into a holistic intrapersonal curriculum. Recognition of the penury of literature in adolescent self and spirituality led the researcher to formulate the question, to organize and implement sessions with engaged students in a fluid way, to create an appropriate environment, to collect the data, and to analyze the data along thematic lines. Ultimately, the concept that interconnected components such as competence, encouragement, confidence, and self-esteem allow holistic teaching to flourish when creativity, choice, imagination, and constructivism nourish the adolescent spirit in the classroom. A theory clearly rises from the research. Teaching from a holistic perspective, a teacher can offset the solely outcome-based curriculum directives. The teacher and the adolescents committed to learning can continue to regard outcomes while focusing our commitment to process. To nourish the spirit is key. It is an ongoing process of infinite proportions capable of unleashing the energies of all stakeholders in education: teachers, students, parents, officials. The process, if pursued in a determined and mindful way, will witness the establishment of a civil society, one that endures in a renewable way at all levels: home, school, and community.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.074 | 0.075 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".