MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1608879656 · doi:10.20360/g2gp47

Narratives of “Dynamic Movement” in Disciplinary Literacy

2012· article· en· W1608879656 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Paula Moffat

Bibliographic record

VenueLanguage and Literacy · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiteracy, Media, and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLiteracyDisciplineNumeracyConversationWonderNarrativePedagogyCritical literacyScientific literacySociologyReflection (computer programming)Mathematics educationPsychologyScience educationSocial scienceComputer scienceLiteratureSocial psychologyArtCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Through a narrative inquiry involving a semi-structured interview and autobiographical reflection, the author explores the similarities and differences in literacy pedagogy between a literacy leader and a science teacher. Disciplinary literacy provides an opportunity for both teachers to better understand scientific literacy, and their different perspectives contribute to a rich conversation. Themes of similarities which emerge include embracing multiliteracies, investigation, a critical stance, and wonder Themes of differences include separating writing skills from form and confidence with numeracy and statistics. A collaborative approach to the implementation of disciplinary literacy and to further research is recommended.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.110
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLanguage and LiteracySame topicLiteracy, Media, and EducationFrench-language works237,207