Teaching HIV/AIDS through a Child-to-Child Approach: A Teacher's Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper draws from a larger study conducted in Kenya, which was a narrative inquiry into a teacher’s experiences of teaching the HIV/AIDS curriculum using a child-to-child approach. The two major research questions of this study were: 1) What are the experiences of a teacher teaching the HIV/AIDS curriculum using a child-to-child curriculum approach? 2) What are the experiences of children learning the HIV/AIDS curriculum using a child-to-child curriculum approach? The findings suggest that a teacher who adopted a child-to-child curriculum approach in teaching HIV/AIDS experienced a transformed classroom learning environment characterized by: sharing authority with children; constructing a democratic classroom; learning to listen to children; affirming children’s voices and ownership in learning; creating a partnership with parents; interrupting gendered classroom; and developing children’s advocacy in community matters. The study concludes with recommendations for equipping teachers with the necessary skills to teach the subject. These skills are: the ability to create a child-centered classroom, ability to listen to children, ability to engage parents, and talking openly on issues about HIV/AIDS.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".