Teachers’ Narrative Understandings of Parents: Living and Reliving “Possible Lives” as Professionals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, I explore aspects of a narrative inquiry with former teacher candidates to understand how living out a curriculum of parents (Pushor, 2011; Pushor, 2013) in their university coursework deepened their knowledge and prompted questions about discourses and representations of parents and families. I focus on two former teacher candidates, Cat and Carly, who tell stories of their experiences within a curriculum of parents and then subsequently as teachers. I explore the “possible lives” (Bruner, 1987/2004) they imagine for themselves as teachers and what teacher “life narratives” (Bruner, 1987/2004) they construct and reconstruct in their practice. What is made visible is that when preservice teachers are supported to unpack and examine, with deliberation, ways of living and telling stories of parents, and the philosophical, pedagogical and practical conceptualizations that underpin such living and telling, a curriculum of parents offers preservice teachers possibilities for interrupting habitual teacher life narratives and for guiding the construction and reconstruction of new teacher life narratives (Bruner, 1987/2004).
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 | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".