What's in a Definition? The Implications of Being Defined and Strategies for Change
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Definitions of literacy for adults range from school-based models to functional skills models to a social constructivist approach to literacy. The definition of literacy is especially important because assessment practices reflect an assumed definition of literacy. The author advocates that practitioners adopt a social constructivist worldview of literacy and offers challenges for reconciling the current emphasis on a skills-based model for accountability with this model of literacy. Résumé Les définitions de l'alphabétisation pour les adultes varient et elles vont du modèle de base de l'école jusqu'aux modèles d'habiletés fonctionnelles, allant même jusqu'à une approche constructiviste. La définition de l'alphabétisation prend beaucoup d'importance car les pratiques d'évaluation reflètent la définition à laquelle on adhère. L'auteur soutient id que les praticiens adoptent une vision sociale constructiviste de l'alphabétisation et il leur offre des défis pour réconcilier l'emphase présentement mise sur le modèle fondé sur les habiletés avec son propre modèle de l'alphabétisation.
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 | 0.058 | 0.063 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.080 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.029 | 0.063 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".