MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1600295054 · doi:10.21225/d5mp43

Writing Our Life: Adult Learning and Teaching Through Autobiography

2000· article· en· W1600295054 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of University Continuing Education · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAdult and Continuing Education Topics
Canadian institutionsCanadian Journal of Administrative Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransformative learningBiographyPropositionAdult educationContext (archaeology)Continuing educationMeaning (existential)PedagogyPower (physics)PsychologySociologyMedical educationLiteratureHistoryEpistemologyArtMedicinePsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores the use of autobiography as a tool for teaching and learning in continuing education. In a recent continuing education course on adult learning and development, students took on the project of writing five chapters of their life story. Subsequent interviews with the writers explored the process and effects of writing. The findings suggest that when adult learners undertake autobiographical writing in the context of adult education, they embark on a process of self-exploration and meaning making that, in turn, can promote the development of an enlarged view of themselves and the world around them. Based upon these findings, a proposition is made for the transformative power of putting pen to paper.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.674
Threshold uncertainty score0.979

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.244 · 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